Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

California passed the SB 132 bill which now allows inmates to self ID as women, trans, non-binary, or inter-sex and to then be housed in the prison category of their choice. Moreover, this legislation now rejects the need for inmates to undergo SRS at all. The demand has been high, with 261 requests for transfers since SB 132 took effect Jan. 1, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

I don’t know how anyone can support this “equality” act while simultaneously claiming to care about women’s rights and their safety.

Agree. California needs separate prisons for trans and non-binary people.

Yes I think that is a fair compromise. I can’t imagine many trans men would want to be housed with the male inmates. They would be at high risk for sexual assault.

I suspect a lot of male inmates would prefer the trans prison, so it might not give them any protection. I think the only solution is to go through a psychological and legal process to get a gender certificate. Trans activists don't like this because it's "gatekeeping" to them. But I don't see an alternative that protects both them and others.

I don't think this is true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

California passed the SB 132 bill which now allows inmates to self ID as women, trans, non-binary, or inter-sex and to then be housed in the prison category of their choice. Moreover, this legislation now rejects the need for inmates to undergo SRS at all. The demand has been high, with 261 requests for transfers since SB 132 took effect Jan. 1, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

I don’t know how anyone can support this “equality” act while simultaneously claiming to care about women’s rights and their safety.

Agree. California needs separate prisons for trans and non-binary people.

Yes I think that is a fair compromise. I can’t imagine many trans men would want to be housed with the male inmates. They would be at high risk for sexual assault.

I suspect a lot of male inmates would prefer the trans prison, so it might not give them any protection. I think the only solution is to go through a psychological and legal process to get a gender certificate. Trans activists don't like this because it's "gatekeeping" to them. But I don't see an alternative that protects both them and others.

I mean, the evaluations are to prove there's gender dysphoria, right? Isn't that what being trans is? Suffering from gender dysphoria because your brain and your body don't match?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

California passed the SB 132 bill which now allows inmates to self ID as women, trans, non-binary, or inter-sex and to then be housed in the prison category of their choice. Moreover, this legislation now rejects the need for inmates to undergo SRS at all. The demand has been high, with 261 requests for transfers since SB 132 took effect Jan. 1, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

I don’t know how anyone can support this “equality” act while simultaneously claiming to care about women’s rights and their safety.

Agree. California needs separate prisons for trans and non-binary people.

Yes I think that is a fair compromise. I can’t imagine many trans men would want to be housed with the male inmates. They would be at high risk for sexual assault.

I suspect a lot of male inmates would prefer the trans prison, so it might not give them any protection. I think the only solution is to go through a psychological and legal process to get a gender certificate. Trans activists don't like this because it's "gatekeeping" to them. But I don't see an alternative that protects both them and others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

California passed the SB 132 bill which now allows inmates to self ID as women, trans, non-binary, or inter-sex and to then be housed in the prison category of their choice. Moreover, this legislation now rejects the need for inmates to undergo SRS at all. The demand has been high, with 261 requests for transfers since SB 132 took effect Jan. 1, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

I don’t know how anyone can support this “equality” act while simultaneously claiming to care about women’s rights and their safety.

Agree. California needs separate prisons for trans and non-binary people.

Yes I think that is a fair compromise. I can’t imagine many trans men would want to be housed with the male inmates. They would be at high risk for sexual assault.

I suspect a lot of male inmates would prefer the trans prison, so it might not give them any protection. I think the only solution is to go through a psychological and legal process to get a gender certificate. Trans activists don't like this because it's "gatekeeping" to them. But I don't see an alternative that protects both them and others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

California passed the SB 132 bill which now allows inmates to self ID as women, trans, non-binary, or inter-sex and to then be housed in the prison category of their choice. Moreover, this legislation now rejects the need for inmates to undergo SRS at all. The demand has been high, with 261 requests for transfers since SB 132 took effect Jan. 1, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

I don’t know how anyone can support this “equality” act while simultaneously claiming to care about women’s rights and their safety.

Agree. California needs separate prisons for trans and non-binary people.

Yes I think that is a fair compromise. I can’t imagine many trans men would want to be housed with the male inmates. They would be at high risk for sexual assault.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

California passed the SB 132 bill which now allows inmates to self ID as women, trans, non-binary, or inter-sex and to then be housed in the prison category of their choice. Moreover, this legislation now rejects the need for inmates to undergo SRS at all. The demand has been high, with 261 requests for transfers since SB 132 took effect Jan. 1, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

I don’t know how anyone can support this “equality” act while simultaneously claiming to care about women’s rights and their safety.

Agree. California needs separate prisons for trans and non-binary people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

California passed the SB 132 bill which now allows inmates to self ID as women, trans, non-binary, or inter-sex and to then be housed in the prison category of their choice. Moreover, this legislation now rejects the need for inmates to undergo SRS at all. The demand has been high, with 261 requests for transfers since SB 132 took effect Jan. 1, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

I don’t know how anyone can support this “equality” act while simultaneously claiming to care about women’s rights and their safety.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

+1


I just don’t understand this. It is taking a step back in terms of gender equality. How can people not think men will claim they are women to take advantage in situations? (Ex: male prisoners transferring). In fact what heterosexual male wouldn’t transfer to a women’s prison? And there are definitely men that would use the women’s locker room. These are spaces reserved for women for a reason. And now if you need help from a rape crisis center you get to speak to a male counselor? Because that male’s right to present as female trumps your right to a safe space as a woman. It’s nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?

It is difficult to understand how ANY woman could support this bill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://youtu.be/jOkdR7on6Ok


So women should be ok with sharing a bathroom and changing in a locker room with someone like this? Can you honestly tell yourselves you would have no worries if your young daughter was in the bathroom with this person?

This person has serious anger issues. Scary.

And has the muscles and frame to do some real damage.
If we are the party of science, we need to be consistent.

It is amazing. How many threads are there about how women can’t walk alone because men are predators? How men commit the vast majority of all violent crime? Toxic masculinity talking over and overpowering women?
But all of a sudden if they put on a dress and change their pronouns, women aren’t supposed to be weary? It makes zero sense.

A huge swath of people should be institutionalized, they shouldn’t be out in society ever. Why we are simply allowing this and acting like it’s mentally healthy and common is absolutely insane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://youtu.be/jOkdR7on6Ok


So women should be ok with sharing a bathroom and changing in a locker room with someone like this? Can you honestly tell yourselves you would have no worries if your young daughter was in the bathroom with this person?

This person has serious anger issues. Scary.

And has the muscles and frame to do some real damage.
If we are the party of science, we need to be consistent.

It is amazing. How many threads are there about how women can’t walk alone because men are predators? How men commit the vast majority of all violent crime? Toxic masculinity talking over and overpowering women?
But all of a sudden if they put on a dress and change their pronouns, women aren’t supposed to be weary? It makes zero sense.

Anonymous wrote:https://youtu.be/jOkdR7on6Ok


So women should be ok with sharing a bathroom and changing in a locker room with someone like this? Can you honestly tell yourselves you would have no worries if your young daughter was in the bathroom with this person?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Please watch Abigail Shrier in this short YouTube clip posted above. She sums up the problems with the equality act perfectly and in a way that I believe resonates with liberal thinkers.

Just a heads up: the pearl-clutching about biological men claiming to identify as women to gain an advantage in sports or to enter women's bathrooms does not convince anyone but credulous Republicans.

So you're just going to completely ignore the article posted on the previous page regarding violent men transferring to women's prison under the guise that they feel like women huh? How many women will have to be harmed before people like you get it?