Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Go badger someone else. My post was quite clear, and doesn’t require clarification.
Well, we agree on that.
Because your post is anti-women, and that's exactly how I read it. You see no need to clarify your accusation that the girls probably have no issue at all changing with a man who dates women in their locker room and didn't mean what they said.
The problem is, women who are uncomfortable are not being heard. They are being told to put their feelings aside to accommodate the feelings of men who wish to be women.
If men want to wear makeup and dresses, I really don’t care as it is their choice and has no impact on me. When they start demanding access to female spaces, I draw the line. I will always stand with women over men who want to be women because I’m a woman and the mother of girls.
Tolerating this is a bad idea.
Agreed. I hope this situation cause some people who have had trouble understanding what the Women's march was about gain some insight.
Agreed. I hope this situation cause some people who have had trouble understanding what the Women's march was about gain some insight.
The Women’s March organizers call women who speak up about this issue bigots and TERF’s. They have not taken the side of women on this issue. Not at all.
I quoted the part that I wanted to respond to. It’s pretty common of people to do that here on CD.
Is it? It’s also pretty common to snip posts so one part is out of context, in order to misrepresent the person you’re quoting in some fashion.
One can quote an entire post and bold the part they’re responding to. Which keeps the context and intent of a poster’s POV. That’s also quite common here on CD.
The Women’s March organizers call women who speak up about this issue bigots and TERF’s. They have not taken the side of women on this issue. Not at all.
Because your post is anti-women, and that's exactly how I read it. You see no need to clarify your accusation that the girls probably have no issue at all changing with a man who dates women in their locker room and didn't mean what they said.
As you were.
None of my post was “anti women”. To the contrary. Good lawd you have an active imagination.
A man would be sorry if he walked in on my 13 year old granddaughter. She won a state title in gymnastics at 11, competed at the nationals. And then she quit when they started making her compete against boys. So she would kick the crap out of a man who walked in on her. She has been weightlifting and can dead lift 400 lbs.
At the time I thought it was about supporting and protecting women’s rights. Now they seem to support men who want to be women over women. It’s very strange.
Is it? It’s also pretty common to snip posts so one part is out of context, in order to misrepresent the person you’re quoting in some fashion.
One can quote an entire post and bold the part they’re responding to. Which keeps the context and intent of a poster’s POV. That’s also quite common here on CD.
Yes, it is very common. Sorry you’re getting so upset over how people post. You seem more upset abut this very common posting style then about women experiencing discomfort and concerns over sharing women’s facilities with men.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
