Open mike 06/06/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, June 6th, 2023 - 108 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

108 comments on “Open mike 06/06/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Sanctuary 1
    6 June 2023 at 8:10 am

    I guess TVNZ was too busy leading with crime stories basically every day for the last two weeks to do any actual journalism, but I would have thought questions to the government on if it has any exposure to this humdinger of a scandal involving Price Waterhouse-Coopers in Australia would have been of interest.

    Basicallt, PWC worked on tax law changes for the government then passed on the details of those changes to it's corporate clients so they could get their new tax avoidance measures in place ahead of the law changes.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/05/pwc-australia-names-former-partners-it-says-misused-confidential-information-in-tax-scandal

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/pwcs-future-in-australia-under-threat-as-crisis-grows/ZGMBIS6CW5BMVJ77M2OVT4E4UM/

    • ianmac 1.1
      6 June 2023 at 3:04 pm

      The Listener 3-9 June touches on the same issue. Tom Seymour and Peter Collins from PwC were named in the tax avoidance tricks. Part of an article about getting rid of consultants and investing in skilled public servants.

      Meanwhile a beneficiary gets headlines for a few hundred dollars overpayments.

  2. arkie 2
    6 June 2023 at 9:27 am

    The rights and wellbeing of renters are supported by the Green party:

    The Green Party are today launching a campaign asking for people to submit their stories of what they call subpar, substandard and downright awful experiences of renting in Aotearoa.

    Data from StatsNZ's 2019 housing report shows one in three New Zealand households are less likely to be satisfied with their accommodation compared to homeowners.

    Swarbrick says the campaign will "give renters a platform to tell their stories directly, to make their basic human rights impossible for Parliament and the Government to ignore".

    Listen to the interview with Corin Dann: https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018893147/greens-say-it-s-time-for-renters-to-tell-it-like-it-is

    “An affordable, warm, healthy and secure home is literally a human right. Yet it’s one denied to far too many of the 1.4 million renters in this country,” says the Green Party’s spokesperson for renters, Chlöe Swarbrick.

    “This is a political choice. Aotearoa New Zealand is not the first country in the world to deal with a housing crisis, but we are profoundly unique in how our economy privileges those who own property and fails to protect those who rent.

    “Enough is enough. Today we’re launching a campaign to give renters a platform to tell their stories directly, to make their basic human rights impossible for Parliament and the Government to ignore.

    “Renters: it’s time to tell it like it is.

    Submit your story here: https://www.greens.org.nz/greens_launch_rental_stories_campaign

    • The Chairman 2.1
      7 June 2023 at 9:07 am

      The healthy homes standards became law on 1 July 2019.

      So what is the actual aim of this new Green campaign?

      • arkie 2.1.1
        7 June 2023 at 9:15 am

        Many landlords are failing to meet those standards:

        Compliance with healthy homes standards is still lagging more than two years since the law took effect.

        Advocates say it is leaving renters powerless as they get stuck in draughty, mouldy homes, amid rental shortages.

        …

        In two years, landlords that do not meet their obligations under the healthy homes standards will be in breach of the Residential Tenancies Act.

        They may be liable for damages of up to $7200, but only if tenants take it to the tribunal.

        https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2022/07/renters-stuck-in-draughty-mouldy-homes-as-landlord-compliance-with-healthy-homes-standards-lags-advocates.html

        The Government is not monitoring or enforcing the law:

        Associate Housing Minister Poto Williams has revealed the Government is not collecting data on how many rentals are compliant with its Healthy Homes Standards.

        Williams also revealed there is no requirement for rental properties to be assessed by third parties to verify whether the property meets the Healthy Homes Standards.

        Williams made the revelations in written responses to Green MP Chlöe Swarbrick, who says it's time to start registering rental properties and their status in compliance with Healthy Homes standards in the form of a Warrant of Fitness (WOF).

        "We need to get the basics right," Swarbrick, the Green Party's spokesperson and advocate for renters, told Newshub.

        "That means registering rental properties and their status in compliance with Healthy Homes Standards in the form of a WOF, as well as landlords and property managers, to ensure things are up to scratch and everyone's protected and aware of their rights and responsibilities if anything goes wrong.

        "We can only build decent systems when we have decent data and the ability to easily pinpoint system failure."

        https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/03/government-not-collecting-data-on-healthy-homes-standards-compliance.html

        • The Chairman 2.1.1.1
          7 June 2023 at 9:22 am

          So they are seeking more enforcement of compliance? Such as a WOF for rentals?

          This will seemingly add further costs to landlords, thus tenants.

          Do the Greens have something in mind to overcome this?

  3. PsyclingLeft.Always 3
    6 June 2023 at 9:54 am

    “We encourage all New Zealanders to hold their local supermarket to account, no matter how small the pricing mistake(s) may be.”

    “While we think it’s unfair to put the responsibility on shoppers, we don’t think supermarkets plan to up their game and rectify this issue anytime soon. It’s up to us to hold the major supermarkets to account.”

    https://www.odt.co.nz/business/calls-investigation-dodgy-supermarket-specials

    Yea. The supermarket duopolists are never going to do it willingly. They could give a rats arse about people (despite their bullshit "feelgood" advertising)

    Good on Consumer…fighting for NZ consumers.

  4. Anne 4
    6 June 2023 at 11:47 am

    The 2023 version of Dirty Politics is in progress:

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/transport-minister-michael-woods-wife-julie-fairey-has-a-separate-interest-in-auckland-airport/RXHISVIZQBG2ZAAMXFEWORVTGA/

    So Michael Woods had a little over 1000 Airport shares in a trust fund. He took them out as a teenager – must have been 30 plus years ago. So somebody has been digging around inside his personal financial affairs. Is that legal?

    Somebody talked me into taking out 500 shares (not Airport) when I was a teenager. I forgot for years they even existed. Some National luminaries, at least in days gone by, cooked their books on a regular basis but that was okay. Minor infringements usually committed unwittingly by Labour luminaries are a different story?

    • Mike the Lefty 4.1
      6 June 2023 at 12:00 pm

      When have National EVER contested an election without resorting to lies and dirty tricks?

      Answer: not in my lifetime at least.

      • Jack 4.1.1
        6 June 2023 at 12:09 pm

        What National lies? Does Minster Woods own the shares – yes or no? How is this a National issue?

        So Minister Woods bought the shares as a teenager and they’re held in a Trust. What teenager has a trust?

        He thought he sold them? Until he didn’t.

        Now we are hearing his wife has an interest in the shares (per Anne’s link above). Assuming she will recuse herself from the Auckland Council vote on said share sale later this week.

        This story has quite some way to go I suspect.

        • AB 4.1.1.1
          6 June 2023 at 12:20 pm

          Wood has owned a completely trivial number of shares for a long time. If as Minister he was able to do something that increased the value of those shares, he stands to gain by a few hundred dollars at best. And in reality, the value of airport shares is more likely to increase if Brownie is able to sell the Council's holding – something that Wood probably opposes, and his partner Ms Fairey, does oppose.

          This looks like an inconsequential and inadvertent technical breach of the rules by Wood. He should correct the record and move on.

          As usual with the political right, their accusations are a form of projection. They accuse others of doing exactly the sort of dodgy things they would do given the same opportunity, or are in fact are already doing in private.

          • Jack 4.1.1.1.1
            6 June 2023 at 12:24 pm

            Go it. The rules around declaring financial interests, particularly when they relate to a Minister with direct portfolio responsibilities, are just there for funsies. Glad to have that sorted.

        • observer 4.1.1.2
          6 June 2023 at 12:30 pm

          Then John Key's political career should have been over before he ever became PM. See Joe90's link below (of course I assume you do remember, and the political reporters remember, but these tedious games of fake outrage must be played).

          But I don't think Key's omission was enough to make him resign, any more than Wood's is today. If that's the ethical bar, then half the National cabinet should have been hounded out of office. For example …

          Today's words to Google: "Murray McCully" and "Saudi sheep".

        • Visubversa 4.1.1.3
          6 June 2023 at 12:38 pm

          Ever heard the words "Family Trust"? Many couples have their house etc in a Family Trust. My parents did.

    • joe90 4.2
      6 June 2023 at 12:02 pm

      But did anyone ever ask?

      In an interview with One News last night, Mr Key faltered when asked about the shares, initially saying his family owned 25,000-50,000 shares, then shifting to "sometimes 50,000, sometimes 100,000" then finally "yeah, sorry, it was 100,000 in total".

      Asked why he had only ever admitted to the 30,000 shares owned by the family trust, Mr Key said: "No one's ever asked me the number I owned."

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/key-caught-out-over-rail-shares/6USXEACH6DEXR3FAI4V2SD5RQE/

    • Tiger Mountain 4.3
      6 June 2023 at 1:16 pm

      Yep, the Natzo underwear sniffers and wheelie bin snoopers are officially back Anne!

      Ex PM Mr Key’s largish holding of rail shares, as several posters have reminded us above, was fine back in the day–nothing to see here for the media that used to give JK hot towels and back rubs. But I guess with the Supercity Airport shares up for flogging off to the nearest venture capitalist or pension investment fund, this has some further importance for certain people.

    • Patricia Bremner 4.4
      6 June 2023 at 2:23 pm

      Agee 100% Anneyes

    • Corey 4.5
      6 June 2023 at 4:59 pm

      It's all about optics, everyone knows Key and the Tory's have shares in everything and will exploit every loophole, this kind of thing is expected of national.

      Labour and the Greens, are held to a different standard, not just by media but by voters and their own members.

      $13000 is a lot of money for most people in NZ, who can barely rub two dollars together, for many voters $13 k is not insignificant and hearing the minister responsible has undeclared conflicts looks grubby and it is inappropriate.

      Im glad Hipkins acted swiftly and removed Wood while the issue is sorted turning it into a non issue.

      $13 is a shit load of money to the people labour need to vote for it.

    • Herodotus 4.6
      6 June 2023 at 5:24 pm

      The guy cannot hold his story – He was going to sell them in 2020 then he didn't, for some reason."There were about six times that there had been discussions between Wood and the Cabinet office about divesting his shares, Hipkins said. That was since the end of 2020 when those six instances occurred." SIX !!!! Now he acts.
      He received dividends and declares the income under his tax returns & financial reports mailed under his name would that not prompt a reminder who owns them ??
      again it its the ever shifting story as more details are reported- that is what is sinking him IMO

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/prime-minister-chris-hipkins-to-face-further-questions-over-michael-woods-auckland-airport-shares-controversy/FOHZP2TOBNDRRI7NHTRKRUPEGU/

      He thought they were in a trust then we find out he owns them outright. When he prepares his tax return the dividends would have been declared under his tax return.

      • Incognito 4.6.1
        6 June 2023 at 5:42 pm

        The last Financial Year in which those shares paid dividend was 2019.

        https://corporate.aucklandairport.co.nz/investors/shares-and-bonds

        In other words, there was nothing to declare on his Tax Return.

        Please stop making up shit, thanks.

        • Herodotus 4.6.1.1
          6 June 2023 at 7:19 pm

          There were dividends to declare pre 2019 no stop trying to deflect, My comment is not limited to the last few years and does hold up, I am not making anything up, perhaps some need to take a breath before firing off false accusation at others ?? If you need an English lesson "He received dividends and declares the income under his tax returns" my comments were plural, so that then covers any period, including pre 2019 !!!! When I note he was the Senior Whip and Deputy Leader of the House- A senior within the 1st Jacinda Adern govt.

          And now we are told he thought he sold them "Wood said he did not disclose them as he thought they had been sold." And what about the SIX times he was asked about divesting from the shares ???

          https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/491423/transport-minister-michael-wood-stood-down-after-airport-shares-controversy

          • Incognito 4.6.1.1.1
            6 June 2023 at 7:35 pm

            Of course, you were making up shit.

            You wrote this:

            He was going to sell them in 2020 […] That was since the end of 2020 […]

            And you blabbered something about declaring income from dividends on his Tax Returns when there hasn’t been anything paid since FY-2019.

            Yet now you claim:

            […] my comments were plural, so that then covers any period, including pre 2019 !!!!

            Do your comments go back all the way to 1998? Just asking, so that you can make up your mind what BS comment you can come up with this time, singular or plural, it doesn’t make a difference.

            • Herodotus 4.6.1.1.1.1
              6 June 2023 at 7:48 pm

              If you would have taken time and notice that the 2022 comment was within quote marks and there was a link ?? So I was NOT making it up, I was quoting the NZ Herald. So perhaps you need to STOP making things up ??? And how about an apology for claiming that I was making things up !!!
              Your 1st comment made no reference about 2022, it related to dividends which I responded. Now it is something else, you are all over the place.

              • Herodotus …
                6 June 2023 at 7:56 pm

                "Wood said he did not disclose them as he thought they had been sold."

                "Having indicated back in 2020 that he was intending to dispose of them, he should have done that."

                https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/491423/transport-minister-michael-wood-stood-down-after-airport-shares-controversy

              • Incognito …
                6 June 2023 at 8:07 pm

                Oh dear, we have a live one here!!!!!!!!!

                Firstly, there is no “2022 comment”.

                Secondly, you wrote:

                He received dividends and declares the income under his tax returns & financial reports mailed under his name would that not prompt a reminder who owns them ??

                This was not within quote marks, not quoted from the NZ Herald, and indeed the NZH does not refer to dividends and Tax Returns as far as I can tell. In other words, they were your words and you made them up.

                It was BS and thus you made up shit, about declaring or not declaring non-existing dividends on Tax Returns, since the end of 2020.

                The only one who’s all over the place and doesn’t even realise it is you.

    • alwyn 4.7
      6 June 2023 at 5:40 pm

      "must have been 30 plus years ago".

      Well no actually. They listed on 28 July 1998 when he was 18.

      It is pretty hard to forget owning shares. They keep sending you stuff, including the dividend statements that would tell him exactly who owned them and how many he owned.

    • Visubversa 5.1
      6 June 2023 at 12:41 pm

      The "religious right" just can't stand the competition. They are scared that one day people might work out that there is exactly the same empirical evidence for the possession of a "gendered soul" that there is for an "immortal soul".

    • arkie 5.2
      6 June 2023 at 1:25 pm

      They can always tell /s

      A lesbian cisgender women is escorted out of the women’s bathroom by police because a Karen called the cops on her think she was a man.

      Bathroom transvestigations are only about enforcing gender conformity. Nothing else.

      https://twitter.com/KarbonSays/status/1659966632926801920

      • Molly 5.2.1
        6 June 2023 at 1:40 pm

        That's a foreseeable additional harm to women, from the threat of men using single-sex spaces.

        It is not a reasonable argument for the abandonment of single-sex provisions.

        • arkie 5.2.1.1
          6 June 2023 at 1:56 pm

          How do you propose to enforce 'single-sex provisions' in bathrooms that do not result in this 'additional' harm to women?

          • Molly 5.2.1.1.1
            6 June 2023 at 2:07 pm

            Clarity. Stop the linguistic gymnastics that pretend that single-sex provisions are not related to sex. Clear boundaries make transgressions easier to identity and address because they are uncommon. Thereby, reducing the challenge to non-confirming people of both sexes.

            Single-sex spaces are neither femininity nor masculinity testing stations.

            They will however demonstrate the cognitive capacity, and/or decision making level of those that knowingly break those single-sex boundaries by prioritising personal feelings.

            BTW, still not an argument for the elimination of single-sex provisions. Just a diversion.

            • arkie 5.2.1.1.1.1
              6 June 2023 at 2:16 pm

              Trans people exist. Would you have transmen in women's bathrooms too? Wouldn't they also have cops called on them, seeing that they look, for all intents and purposes, to be men? Anti-trans people already have difficulty determining 'sex' and differentiating between that and gender norms, as the above example proves.

              It's interesting that you prefer to prioritise your personal feelings.

              • Molly …
                6 June 2023 at 2:30 pm

                "Trans people exist."

                Where have I implied otherwise?

                "Would you have transmen in women's bathrooms too?"

                Given that they are women, Yes. But depending on their degree of transition and presentation, they should be aware that they will be challenged more often – primarily because of the lack of clarity I spoke of before that has been interpreted by many men as permission to break single-sex boundaries. It is a natural consequence of both those aspects.

                "Wouldn't they also have cops called on them, seeing that they look, for all intents and purposes, to be men?"

                Unlikely. Calling the police is not a response of many women and girls to men invading their spaces. They usually just get out as fast as possible, and/or report to the service provider.

                "Anti-trans people already have difficulty determining 'sex' and differentiating between that and gender norms, as the above example proves."

                This sentence doesn't make sense.

                "It's interesting that you prefer to prioritise your personal feelings."

                I understand there are differences between biological sexes in terms of practical needs, privacy, dignity, and safety. These realities are identifiable, and in cases of assault – recorded in statistical data.

                Safeguarding risk assessments that resulted in single-sex provisions as significantly reducing (not eliminating) risk of harm, did not rely on my personal feelings – but robust statistical evidence.

                It is the same robust statistical evidence that has to be provided in support of boundary breaking – and then weighted against – the issues of safety, privacy, dignity and consent, before considering whether single-sex boundaries can reasonably be broken.

                Look to Chesterton's Fence – for where to start when you seek to dismantle existing boundaries:

                https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/

                • arkie …
                  6 June 2023 at 2:58 pm

                  "Anti-trans people already have difficulty determining 'sex' and differentiating between that and gender norms, as the above example proves."

                  This sentence doesn't make sense.

                  Anti-trans people called the police on a cisgender woman because they thought she was trans. They failed to determine her sex and assumed it based on their own interpretations of gender norms. If these anti-trans people were always capable of determining sex as is claimed, then they wouldn't have called police to eject a woman from the women's bathroom would they?

                  Absent a chromosome test and/or genital inspections we rely on gender and the societal expectations of such, to determine which 'single-sex' space someone should occupy. This can go wrong, as above, and in your preferred scenario would be much more common and confusing with male-presenting people in the women's bathroom and vice versa.

                  did not rely on my personal feelings – but robust statistical evidence.

                  Please supply this 'robust' evidence.

                  • Molly …
                    6 June 2023 at 3:09 pm

                    arkie, you are focusing on one incident and extrapolating that as if it is indicative of a persuasive argument. It is not. It is a waste of my time to point this out to you repeatedly so I will not.

                    "Absent a chromosome test and/or genital inspections we rely on gender and the societal expectations of such, to determine which 'single-sex' space someone should occupy. "

                    This conflation of DSD's with gender identities is common, and along with conflation of sex with gender identities, is just poor logic.

                    "Please supply this 'robust' evidence."

                    I am surprised you are unaware.

                    However, a link for you. Please note the proviso, it is becoming increasingly hard to find up-to-date figures that distinguish by sex, due to the capture of statistical departments (including our own) who interchange sex and gender identity without regard to accuracy:

                    https://supportingsurvivors.humboldt.edu/statistics#:~:text=An%20estimated%2091%25%20of%20victims,identify%20in%20these%20gender%20boxes.

                    • An estimated 91% of victims of rape & sexual assault are female and 9% male. Nearly 99% of perpetrators are male. 1 This US Dept. of Justice statistic does not report those who do not identify in these gender boxes.

                    Did you honestly require a statistical reference for this?

                    Looking forward to reading yours.

                    • arkie …
                      6 June 2023 at 3:32 pm

                      If transmen are to use women's bathrooms surely that makes it easier for male predators to enter those spaces without 'pretending to be a woman' to gain that access?

                      90% of women survivors were victimised by someone known to them, 23% of women were assaulted by a partner or ex-partner, 24% were assaulted a family member, 44% were assaulted by "another known person". Just 9% were assaulted by strangers.

                      I was specifically asking for the 'robust' evidence that transwomen are a risk to women in bathrooms. This isn't actually possible because they are not.

                    • Molly …
                      6 June 2023 at 3:47 pm

                      @arkie

                      I provided the statistics on my contribution which is based on "sex". I do not conflate sex with gender identity, and the single-sex provisions relate to sexed differences.

                      "I was specifically asking for the 'robust' evidence that transwomen are a risk to women in bathrooms. This isn't actually possible because they are not."

                      I don't need to provide it. Alongside many other males, they are included in the statistics I have given you. Along with males who are eight years old, blind teenaged boys, men with mobility issues, men and boys with cancer, men with mental incapacity – they are included.

                      Because you wish to extract men with gender identities from these statistics, so that they can be treated independently of their sex, you need to find the data that supports that treatment. Then any advantages to that cohort must be considered and weighted against the impact on women and girls.

                      Until you provide the 'robust' evidence that they are significantly different to other males, then you cannot make the second claim. In fact, you cannot make the second claim unless you provide evidence that NO harm will be enacted on women at ANY time, in ANY place by men with gender identities.

                      "This isn't actually possible because they are not."

                      You are the one making this extraordinary claim.

                      I wait for your extraordinary evidence to support it.

                    • arkie …
                      6 June 2023 at 3:55 pm

                      Gender Identity Nondiscrimination Laws in Public Accommodations: a Review of Evidence Regarding Safety and Privacy in Public Restrooms, Locker Rooms, and Changing Rooms

                      …

                      This study finds that the passage of such laws is not related to the number or frequency of criminal incidents in these spaces. Additionally, the study finds that reports of privacy and safety violations in public restrooms, locker rooms, and changing rooms are exceedingly rare. This study provides evidence that fears of increased safety and privacy violations as a result of nondiscrimination laws are not empirically grounded.

                      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z

                      Interestingly cismen are the most concerned about transwomen's access to women's bathrooms

                      These statistics show that cisgender males are not only more likely to be concerned with safety and privacy surrounding transgender females in female bathrooms, but are also more likely to express that transgender females directly cause their concerns.

                      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12147-016-9181-6

                    • Molly …
                      6 June 2023 at 4:12 pm

                      @arkie

                      Paywalled, so I can't read methodology.

                      Also, a couple of points:

                      1. You claimed that " …transwomen are a risk to women in bathrooms. This isn't actually possible because they are not."

                      That statement is negated by the existence of one such incident. I'll choose this one from many I am aware of.

                      https://www.foxnews.com/media/oklahoma-transgender-student-charged-assaulting-female-high-school-classmates-bathroom

                      1. Unless there is a universal and comprehensive method of gathering such data, there will be no statistics proving the harm of men with gender identities. It is unlikely that females report incidents, and there is no assurance that if they do service providers record it. The escalation needed to make criminal reports – would obscure many incidents as well.

                      For example, I could make the same claim about male gardeners. eg. There exists no evidence to show that male gardeners are of harm to women and girls.

                      It is both poor reasoning and evidence.

                      The only comprehensive evidence we have is that based on sex.

                      As for the second social media analysis. I'm not really that interested in the ratio of that kind of limited analysis, which is all it offers. Counting the uninformed reckons of people on the internet is good for polling, but not for considered reasoning.

                    • arkie …
                      6 June 2023 at 5:30 pm

                      As usual I never expected you to argue in good faith. I have provided the 'extraordinary' evidence you required that your concerns are unfounded ie Not Empirically Grounded. You choose to ignore it so that you can continue your monomania. Enjoy.

                    • Molly …
                      6 June 2023 at 7:41 pm

                      @arkie

                      I always engage in good faith, and with honesty.

                      "I have provided the 'extraordinary' evidence you required that your concerns are unfounded ie Not Empirically Grounded. You choose to ignore it so that you can continue your monomania. "

                      I do not agree about the quality of your evidence – and said why.

                      Instead of providing the missing methodology or responding to points raised, you seem to fall into personal insults while running away.

                      That's OK. Catch you another time.

                    • tWiggle …
                      6 June 2023 at 8:11 pm

                      Trans women are men :: all men rape :: transwomen using womens's toilets rape.

                      Molly, this is how your argument develops.

                    • Molly …
                      6 June 2023 at 8:22 pm

                      @tWiggle

                      "Trans women are men :: all men rape :: transwomen using womens's toilets rape.

                      Molly, this is how your argument develops."

                      No. It does not.
                      (Despite how much you may want it to – in order to justify your inability to provide a good argument for your perspective.)

                      If you want to link to where I have said this – go ahead.

                      I'll wait.

                    • Molly …
                      7 June 2023 at 11:47 am

                      An article relating the second point made in this comment:

                      .https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-06-06-2023/#comment-1952846

                      https://www.feministcurrent.com/2023/06/06/my-mother-is-courageous-but-faced-with-a-man-in-her-change-room-at-ottawas-nepean-sportsplex-she-went-silent/

                      "My mother is 66 years old and no shrinking violet. I have never known her in any circumstance to shy away from confrontation. In the decades she has been swimming at this pool, she has had several run-ins with the lifeguards, management, and other swimmers. From too-slow swimmers clogging up the fast lane to the Covid-related mask mandates, my mother has always fearlessly spoken her mind. During Covid, she fought back so relentlessly against having to wear a mask on the pool deck for the few minutes before entering the water that we worried she might end up in handcuffs. She wasn’t charged, but she did face a short-term suspension from the Sportsplex as a result of her protests.

                      Yet when a man walked naked through the changeroom while she was in her most vulnerable state, my mother went silent."

                • Molly …
                  6 June 2023 at 2:59 pm

                  Also meant to mention, that the impact on women's and girls on males entering their single-sex provisions is significantly different than the impact on men and boys of females doing the same.

                  Because of the sexed differences listed above.

                  In terms of safety and statistics, a women entering a male single-sex provision raises the safety of the male users – and reduces her own. A male entering a women's single-sex space, statistically reduces the likelihood of harm to themselves, while significantly raising the risk for the female users.

                  Because of the sexed differences listed above.

              • CAnker the pig fucker …
                6 June 2023 at 3:08 pm

                I think Molly is prioritizing her own personal feelings and also biological reality.

                Public toilets and change rooms have long been separated based on sex.

                That trans people have a problem and with that, I have some sympathy for. But I am afraid there is no way I will accept as the solution that male bodied people who identify as women be allowed into womens change rooms. Nope, nada never……..And the good people of Invercargill are fighting this very issue right now.

                Megyn Kelly who was initally a cheer leader for Trans rights says it very well here.

                Why can't you accept no for an answer Arkie?

                • Molly …
                  6 June 2023 at 3:16 pm

                  Hey, Anker.

                  "I think Molly is prioritizing her own personal feelings and also biological reality."

                  Thanks for that. I agree with the second, but not with the first.

                  I approach this from a place of logic, and my feelings remain personal and strong, but are not put forward as an argument about the non-emotive aspects of single-sex provisions. And I don’t often talk about the comfort of such provisions, so my feelings are not often part of my reasoning.

                  The insistence on removing or ignoring single-sex boundaries doesn't make sense to me, which is why I'm happy to engage in discussions regarding it. With the right questions, someone may be able to come up with an explanation that does make sense, and be able to address the concerns raised with solutions – rather than a demand for capitulation.

                  Till then…

                • tWiggle …
                  6 June 2023 at 8:41 pm

                  Trans women having been using womens's spaces for decades. In the UK, it's been legal since 2010. No sex or harrassment crimes reported in the UK by trans women in womens' spaces in the 12 years since.

                  In the US, in 2015, the first 'preventative' legislation to ban trans women was introduced, in Louisiana, I think. 10 US states had had trans inclusive legislation for up to a decade. There were no reports from police, rape crisis organisations, etc from those 10 trans inclusive states of sexual attacks by trans women in those spaces. The legislator introducing the bill, which was passed, had no evidence of harm, he just wanted to 'prevent' trans women.

                  Talking about 'men in dresses who bring penises into bathrooms', is wanting to 'prevent' NZ trans women from going about their lives, as they have been doing, without proof.

              • weka …
                6 June 2023 at 3:19 pm

                Trans people exist. Would you have transmen in women's bathrooms too?

                the best solution I have heard was in a recent twitter Space where transsexual people were talking about the need to go where you fit in. So a TM who has done the full works is probably going to be better off in a male toilet. A TW who has socially transitioned but still looks male, is better off in a male toilet too.

                In a place like NZ we still have some choices which way this goes. But that won't last forever and the more that cross dressing and NB males push the boundaries on this, the more public backlash there will be. Most people don't care that much if fully transition TW use women's toilets where they just want to go and not cause a hassle. It's the AGPs and activists who are making a song and a dance and worse (cue references to AGPs masturbating in women's toilets and posting that online). No-one will put up with that shit because it's hugely disrespectful and it breaches social norms. (by no-one, I mean the general public).

                Wouldn't they also have cops called on them, seeing that they look, for all intents and purposes, to be men? Anti-trans people already have difficulty determining 'sex' and differentiating between that and gender norms, as the above example proves.

                I don't know what is going on in that video because there is no context or evidence for what it is. I can't tell if the person being thrown out is male or female, when it happened, where it happened, what prompted the scene in the first place. It's a piece of gotcha SM clickbait.

                Beyond the toilet issue, it basically comes down to whether people support women's sex based rights or not. Women aren't going to back down from this, because our rights matter. How that plays out is as much on liberals as anyone else.

                • Molly …
                  6 June 2023 at 3:31 pm

                  "the best solution I have heard was in a recent twitter Space where transsexual people were talking about the need to go where you fit in. So a TM who has done the full works is probably going to be better off in a male toilet."

                  The very real concern I have for this as a solution, is the added impetus it gives to young people – and others but particularly the young – to approach transition as means to get access to single-sex spaces, rather than significant interventions to be approached with caution, maturity and full understanding of impacts.

                  As the number of detransitioners continues to grow – particularly among the young – this concern about the added pressure on young people to pass as the opposite sex becomes stronger.

                  For that reason, I don't think it is a good solution in the current climate.

                  (It also performs the usual conflation of gender identity and sex, which at the moment, I have little patience for.)

                  • weka …
                    6 June 2023 at 4:16 pm

                    The very real concern I have for this as a solution, is the added impetus it gives to young people – and others but particularly the young – to approach transition as means to get access to single-sex spaces, rather than significant interventions to be approached with caution, maturity and full understanding of impacts.

                    I don't think girls transition to gain access to men's spaces (in fact some get a shock once they do access at what that means for them). Many are transitioning to try and escape being female. Those girls are always welcome in women's spaces. But if they have fully transitioned (Buck Angel level transition), then it may work better for them to use male toilets.

                    AGPs on the other hand, do seem to transition to access spaces. In NZ I think the number of passing AGPs is relatively small, so I'm less concerned about this.

                    As the number of detransitioners continues to grow – particularly among the young – this concern about the added pressure on young people to pass as the opposite sex becomes stronger.

                    I'm not following you there. Can you please explain in a different way?

                    Basically I'm saying that TIFs should go to whatever toilet works. Same with transsexual TIMs. AGPs are a different matter and the sooner the public gets to knowing what AGP is the better (preferably without the whole groomer/pervert rhetoric)

                    • Molly …
                      6 June 2023 at 4:23 pm

                      Watching the stories from those who have transitioned, there often seems to be a number of milestones that they follow.

                      For females, it is puberty blockers, testosterone injections, breast removal etc. and the testing of the success of these interventions is reliant on their ability to pass as the opposite sex.

                      As some who later on detransition relate, that validation of being able to use a male facility or not be challenged when doing so, is already a big incentive to go on testosterone, have surgery etc. These are significant medical interventions.

                      If single-sex policies are rewritten to accommodate such passing – that compulsion that looks for external validation, is further supported by public policy which has an impact on decision making.

                      It also ignores aspects that do not have anything to do with safety. Biological differences in practical needs, dignity, privacy safety and consent.

                      These considerations apply to men as well. The safety factor, perhaps the one most significantly different to women.

                    • arkie …
                      6 June 2023 at 6:08 pm

                      AGP or autogynephilia is a pseudoscientific, disease-based theory that if applied to cis women would result is 93% of them being diagnosed as autogynephilic: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00918360903005212

                      TIF and TIM are not the accepted terms, they are trans man and trans woman respectively. To do otherwise is to deliberately misgender:

                      I just think it's hilarious that if you pronounce "TIM" as one word, it's a man's name. Same thing about "TIF" – it's a woman's name lol.

                      Maybe we should started calling TIMs Timothys and TIFs Tiffanys

                      https://ovarit.com/o/GenderCritical/44438/pronouncing-tim-and-tif

                    • Molly …
                      6 June 2023 at 8:11 pm

                      @arkie

                      AGP is vehemently protested because it confirms a sexual aspect and motivation to some men with gender identities. Some men, however, acknowledge their AGP openly:

                      http://www.annelawrence.com/autogynephilia_&_MtF_typology.html

                      It's worthwhile to research Ray Blanchard, and listen to interviews or lectures he gives. He is quite sympathetic to the patients he draws his perspective from, and worked as a clinician for many years. From a purely personal point of view, I find some of his off-hand comments to be revealing of a disparaging view of women. But that doesn't negate his experience or observations.

                      There is a good analysis of Charles Moser's paper here:

                      https://www.rodfleming.com/mischievous-charles-moser/

                      "Blanchard’s Typology, first developed 30 years ago, has been under constant criticism from certain MtFs who would be identified by Blanchard as AGP. This reached fever pitch when J Michael Bailey published ‘The Man Who Would be Queen’, which I wrote a retrospective review of HERE.

                      It is into this battlefield — and the word is not ill-chosen — that Moser forayed.

                      Moser employed two methods; one was a small study he designed which proposed to test whether autogynephilia, which was defined by Blanchard as ‘a man’s propensity to be sexually aroused by himself, as a woman’ actually existed. To do this, he simply asked some women academic colleagues if they would complete the Questionnaire that Blanchard had devised to diagnose autogynephilia in men.

                      This is where we get the first indication of the nature of Moser’s scholarship. It operates by decontextualising the subject. Blanchard was not a theoretical researcher, he was a practising clinician. He was responsible for either providing, or not providing, letters justifying MtFs’ desire to have a physical sex change, as was required by the Standards of Care.

                      Blanchard was concerned that many individuals were coming forward who did not fall into the Primary or Homosexual type of MtF but who were obviously still in need of help. Blanchard needed to study what he was seeing in order to be able to provide a scientifically sound basis for awarding them a recommendation for Genital Reconstruction Surgery…."

                      Anne Lawrence PhD – mentioned above – also has critiqued Charles Moser's work in an article that was published in The Journal of Sex Research in 2009:

                      https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224490903230061

                      As for the rest, compelled speech is abhorrent. Regardless of political position, everyone should be against such compulsions.

                      Correctly sexing someone remains an accurate use of language. Not adhering to demands to redefine man and woman is not harmful – it is just not compliance to excessive demands.

                    • tWiggle …
                      6 June 2023 at 9:26 pm

                      AGP is short for autogynephile and is transphobic hate speech.

                    • Molly …
                      8 June 2023 at 9:40 am

                      @tWiggle

                      "AGP is short for autogynephile and is transphobic hate speech."

                      laugh

                • arkie …
                  6 June 2023 at 3:36 pm

                  I don't know what is going on in that video because there is no context or evidence for what it is. I can't tell if the person being thrown out is male or female, when it happened, where it happened, what prompted the scene in the first place. It's a piece of gotcha SM clickbait.

                  Right so this is a problem. You dismiss this but are perfectly accepting of the equivalent if it supports your ideological position.

                  It's deeply ironic to me that the calls for everyone to 'Listen To Women' necessarily involves not listening to trans people.

                  • weka …
                    6 June 2023 at 4:09 pm

                    Right so this is a problem. You dismiss this but are perfectly accepting of the equivalent if it supports your ideological position.

                    Please give me at least two examples where I have done this.

                    I spend a large amount of my online time fact checking. For instance, this morning someone posted a snip of a KJK video. KJK is good for taking out of context because of her hyperbole, she makes good inflammatory clickbait. I went and found the original video, set the start time for the relevant bit and posted it in several places on twitter where I knew people were reacting to the snip. This is my kaupapa. So if you want to suggest I routinely don't do this when it happens to be something I agree with, I'd like some evidence so I know what you are talking about.

                    It's deeply ironic to me that the calls for everyone to 'Listen To Women' necessarily involves not listening to trans people.

                    What are you on about? I literally just referenced a group of transsexuals in the point I was making. It's the GI side that thinks listening to women and trans people is somehow incompatible, hence No Debate.

                    • weka …
                      6 June 2023 at 4:10 pm

                      and, any time you see me using low quality, out of context material to support an argument, please pull me up on it. Joe90 has done this once or twice, I’m not perfect.

                    • arkie …
                      6 June 2023 at 5:26 pm

                      It's not just you, the use of overseas social media sources in this issue is frequent by the regular commenters. A quick sampling of your posts:

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-11-04-2023/#comment-1945102

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-20-04-2023/#comment-1946658

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-20-04-2023/#comment-1946663

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-15-05-2023/#comment-1949922

                      and this one I did specifically call you out:

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-29-03-2023/#comment-1942509

                      It's a waste of my time trying to pull you all up on this issue, it's never-ending, especially seeing that many will not change their minds no matter the evidence or lack thereof… Nope, nada never.

                    • weka []
                      6 June 2023 at 5:49 pm

                      It’s not just you, the use of overseas social media sources in this issue is frequent by the regular commenters. A quick sampling of your posts:

                      I didn’t object to the use of overseas social media sources. I objected to a random video that had no context.

                      If we look at your first example, it’s a link to a quote by Ani O’Brien, where she posts a photo of a stick on a pole saying “hate trans people? kill yourself”. She says it’s been posted in Wellington, and gives her analysis and opinion about it.

                      What exactly is wrong with that? There is context, explanation of the issues, a clear image. Is your objection to Ani? The quality of information in the tweet? What?

                      You seem to be objecting to me posting negative things about gender identity ideology. But you miss the point. Your video would have been an excellent conversation starter if we knew more about it.

                      I’m not dissing the content, I’m saying it’s poor quality material for a decent debate (and tbh I was surprised you posted it because you are usually better than that).

                    • weka []
                      6 June 2023 at 5:59 pm

                      and this one I did specifically call you out:

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-29-03-2023/#comment-1942509

                      Yes you did, and we had a conversation about it. Again, what is the problem specifically? Rereading it now, it appears you didn’t realise that there are people actively saying there is a trans holocaust and that feminists are part of the cause. That’s the context of Nutmeg’s tweets. She was pointing out that the comparison between what happens to trans people and the Holocaust is nauseating. It’s the kind of stupid, propaganda hyberbole that KJK uses on the other side.

                      What’s really happening is that trans people are one of the groups most at risk of rising fascism. That’s different to them being murdered in large numbers by the state. I believe The Disinformation Project that there is a rise in rhetoric from the far right online that is aimed at trans people and wanting them killed or eliminated. This is serious enough without calling it a holocaust or genocide. It seems to me there is a general conflation between genocide rhetoric and murder rates of trans people (the latter being majorly misrepresented in scale and cause. It’s not feminists murdering trans people, it’s usually domestic violence, or in places like South America it’s associated with the sex trade. All wrong and all needing attention but not via bullshit ideologically driven rhetoric).

                    • tWiggle []
                      6 June 2023 at 9:58 pm

                      The Holocaust analogy is, in fact, particularly valid. The virulent anti trans (and now anti rainbow) propaganda, some of which finds its way to The Standard, follows closely the 'degenerate' labelling by nazis of homosexuals and the jewish and romany peoples. Which certainly is well on the path to genocide x. Making trans women out to be predators and groomers without solid evidence is othering and dehumanisation.

                      As I posted here today, all trans people in Florida have lost their right to healthcare affirming their trans identity, not just minors. It affects around 90,000 people. That was quick. Foment enough fear and hate and you'll see how quickly nasty/nazi shit can happen without pushback.

                    • arkie …
                      6 June 2023 at 6:19 pm

                      The United Nations Genocide Convention:

                      Definition

                      Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

                      Article II

                      In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

                      1. Killing members of the group;
                      2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
                      3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
                      4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
                      5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

                      https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

                      Genocide can be any of the above acts, not just mass killing.

                      You posted this after the SUFW event in Naarm/Melbourne that was attended by neo-nazis. It's specifically about those in attendance being called nazis and 'nutmegs' discomfort with the term and it's an attempt to call those protesting the event holocaust-deniers. It still disgusts me that this was posted.

                    • weka []
                      6 June 2023 at 6:43 pm

                      thanks, that’s substance we can get our teeth into.

                      Which of those four categories of people do you feel trans people fit into?

                      Which of those acts apply to trans people, and which groups of people are intent on destroying them?

                      You posted this after the SUFW event in Naarm/Melbourne that was attended by neo-nazis. It’s specifically about those in attendance being called nazis and ‘nutmegs’ discomfort with the term and it’s an attempt to call those protesting the event holocaust-deniers. It still disgusts me that this was posted.

                      It wasn’t a SUFW event, that’s a NZ group. It was a Let Women Speak event. Two weeks before I made my comment. I can’t see how BabyBeginner’s tweet is specifically about Melbourne. Her tweet appears to be in response to ongoing issues with conflating trans issues with genocide rhetoric and blaming women for that. That was happening before Melbourne.

                      As I said at the time, ‘denier’ isn’t a word I would have used. But there is no doubt that there are lots of people misrepresenting what is happening to trans people eg talking about a high trans murder rate is common, but it’s just not true.

                    • arkie …
                      6 June 2023 at 7:01 pm

                      If you don't see it then I can't ever convince you. You are prepared to take a charitable interpretation of those echoing GCF talking points but dismiss and tone police those who disagree with the framing and terminology around this topic. I provide scientific papers that are 'countered' by opinion pieces. And the pile-ons! Look around you, look at what you have made. The sheer number of regular voices that have left or forgone commenting at all because of disagreements over this issue. It's sad, and tiring.

                    • weka []
                      6 June 2023 at 7:51 pm

                      If you don’t see it then I can’t ever convince you

                      See what? If you think there is a trans genocide happening, then step up and do the mahi to convince people. I’ve already told you that I think trans people are at risk in places like the US, this is bloody obvious. I also don’t agree that what is happening to trans people fits the definition of genocide. You do, but you won’t make the argument, so 🤷‍♀️ You know how things go here, people explain their thinking, but you won’t on this issue. Why is that?

                      You are prepared to take a charitable interpretation of those echoing GCF talking points but dismiss and tone police those who disagree with the framing and terminology around this topic.

                      I don’t dismiss and tone police, I make strong arguments against other people’s position. This isn’t a liberal hand holding space. People argue robustly on all topics. You already know this.

                      And yes, I don’t really rate the argument that I shouldn’t use the term TIM, when it’s not actually an argument but rather someone telling me how to speak and think.

                      I provide scientific papers that are ‘countered’ by opinion pieces.

                      This is always a problem here, it’s just part of the work. We make the arguments over time, and some people have better evidence for their views than others. It’s not possible to moderate that any more than we do, but you can always bring this to the attention of moderators.

                      And the pile-ons! Look around you, look at what you have made. The sheer number of regular voices that have left or forgone commenting at all because of disagreements over this issue. It’s sad, and tiring.

                      Pile ons? There is definitely an imbalance in the sense that there are more gender critical people here than there are people that support gender identity ideology. But how is this different than all the times women are outnumbered here?

                      I left the site for 15 months because two male authors trashed the women’s project that a group of women had been working on for a long time. Nothing to do with the sex/gender wars. I can easily count 5 feminist authors that have left here over similar issues, and more women commenters. Again, nothing to do with the sex/gender wars. People come and go, for all sorts of reasons, and some of that is unfair. There are people I miss too.

                      It’s hard work commenting here. It always has been for those of us that are serious about the politics.

                    • tWiggle []
                      6 June 2023 at 9:32 pm

                      Weka. GC feminism is an ideology too. And at odds with trans inclusionary feminism.

                • tWiggle …
                  6 June 2023 at 9:00 pm

                  To correct you weka: only 'some' women 'are not going to back down from this'. Count me and many, many other women out of this anti trans crusade.

                  The ‘count me out’ women include the 30-40% of 'real' women in the 2000-4000 people opposing Posie Parker in Auckland. There were more 'real' women than trans women on the organising committee for the Wellington anti-Parker rally. There were 'real' women who directly opposed Posie Parker's message, like Senator Lidia Thorpe, manhandled in Canberra; and the women who was grabbed around the throat by security and removed from the microphone when she began to speak in opposition at Parker's Melbourne rally.

                  • weka …
                    6 June 2023 at 9:07 pm

                    of course #notallwomen.

                    In the context of my comment it was clear I was talking about women who value women's sex based rights, I didn't need to qualify that by 'some'.

                    I'm not on an anti-trans crusade, so I assume you really have no clue what is going on here.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      7 June 2023 at 10:16 am

                      Weka, I think/know that some want to frame the concern about access to women's safe spaces as being anti-trans when it is nothing of the sort. I am resolutely pro women and my stance comes from this perspective.

                      As far as trans argument it is live and let live, though I do have concerns about child safe guarding, making decsions while too young to make them and the irrevocable nature of some of the decisions but my overriding concern is that women remain able to access safe spaces. To determine what constitutes a safe space for women obviously means that we ask and are guided by what women say, not men.

                      I also realise that even though the argument is pro women rather than anti trans and this is not a nuanced view ie it is a clear, palin ad simple one, it seems difficult for some to understand. Why is this I wonder?

                      What would happen if we actually put this view to the forefront?

                      Would we get better decison making re safe spaces for women and trans people?

                      To answer my own question I believe if we looked at it from the point of view of maintaining safe spaces for women, access to sport for women while asking ourselves what we can do to make safe spaces for transwomen then we would have been much further forward.

                      The reason we are not and there is suspicion and vitriol, is that we were presented with the need to deny biology, our own eyes and agree to the 'Emperor has no clothes' mantra of transwomen are (real) women. Pushback was inevitable.

      • Shanreagh 5.2.2
        6 June 2023 at 5:37 pm

        Two reasons why this comment by Arkie 6 June 2023 at 1:25 pm is probably not worth the time to parse it

        a) the use of the word 'cis', most beloved of the trans community, (who also probably believe it is possible for males to become lesbians), and

        b) the use of the word 'Karen' most beloved by no-one as many recognise it is sexist and probably age-ist.

        Other than that it probably provided some exercise for someone's fingers on the keyboard and I guess that is a plus.

        • weka 5.2.2.1
          6 June 2023 at 6:04 pm

          also this,

          Bathroom transvestigations are only about enforcing gender conformity. Nothing else.

          Which is basically a dude in a tweet saying women don't get to have their own perception of the world.

          • Shanreagh 5.2.2.1.1
            6 June 2023 at 11:32 pm

            Yes Weka, some of these quotes/opinions are bare faced misogyny/sexism. Having been around for a while, years-wise and fought a few battles for womens lib back in the day, and having had a mother and grandmother whose 'spidy' sense could pick a sexist at a 1000 paces I can pick the dudes wanting to deny women.

            Strangely or not they seem to be the same and hold the same sexist views as their predecessors. Though they are able to dress it up as mysterious and new as it relates to poor hard done by men (though disguised)

            I realise that perhaps my words are tough. Where and how did we get to have these unseeing, uncritical people who think biological sex can be changed and who inflict court/tribunal cases on people for such felonies as pronouns, dead-naming.

            I am glad that some jurisdictions are pulling back on the child transitions. Why would we let a child or their parents make a decision that can mean an inability to father/bear a child or, fundamentally, to have a sexual relationship that involves orgasm. Who are these cruel people and who gives them the right to do this to others?

        • tWiggle 5.2.2.2
          6 June 2023 at 10:30 pm

          Gosh, resorting to hairsplitting about terminology. To paraphrase you Shanreagh:

          'I don't agree with arkie's vocab, it doesn't fit with my GC ideology – therefore none of arkie's points are worth considering'

          Cis woman and cis man are terms that trans inclusionary feminists, rainbow supporters, and many men are quite comfortable using to describe themselves in context, eg, when talking about trans issues.

          'Karen' is a meme. Here is what is considered to be a classic 'Karen ' example, a young woman who uses her white woman privilege to falsely accuse a black man of assault after he asks her to put her dog on a leash in a designated bird nesting area.

          • Shanreagh 5.2.2.2.1
            6 June 2023 at 11:17 pm

            No I was not looking looking at it from a GC point of view but from a student of the English language and linguistics.

            Of course groups have their own 'in' words and sayings and this serves as an inclusionary purpose. The words used in Govt circles, economics are shorthand and inclusionary or exclusionary depending on which side the group you stand.

            One of the hallmarks of this trans movement is the erasure of language about those who are the targets. So women and women's spaces are the targets for males wanting to access females safe spaces. So we don't have breast feeding but chest feeding…..

            We have males trying to gate-crash lesbian groups, we have males asking the authorities to censure lesbian groups under rights legislation. These men do not seem to grasp that lesbians care not for the male body, even when it has been tweaked and 'chemicalised'. They are what is called same sex attracted and that same sex is women ie those who are and remain women.

            So we find also that words describing 1-5% of the community need to influence words describing 51%. So instead of the wider word being reserved for the majority we now find that the wider word 'women' has to have an unneeded, additional and uneuphonious (if that is a word – I mean hard on the ear) word added and this is 'cis'. Surely there are bio women and trans women or women and trans women.

            We have the OTT use of the word 'genocide', this truly horrifies me that people in this movement truly believe that what they have essentially brought/wrought on themselves (ie there is a choice about taking drugs or embarking on surgery) is in any way the same as a state/Nazi sanctioned abuse wrought on others such as travellers, Jews, intellectually impaired etc etc. who had no means ie choice to avoid the stigma.

            My distaste for the Karen slur surely needs no explaining. It is ageist and sexist.

            My takeaway from the wider trans movement has been the intense dislike/hatred of women, it seems to be an intensely misogynistic movement, as befits a 'boys own/man's own' adventure.

            I do feel that there are those with gender disphoria and the phrase 'watch-ful waiting' is surely a good one here…..care for the soul/psychiatric help until children reach past puberty and have the mind/experience and tools of life on which to base decisions on whether to take action that may be irrevocable.

    • Molly 5.3
      6 June 2023 at 1:36 pm

      Do you think this result may have been foreseeable (and is justified) by the legal actions of WPATH, the AAP and the Endocrine Society who not only failed to provide the clinical evidence requested by Florida to support their proscribed methods of care, but joined together to attempt to legally avoid having to do so?

      https://t.co/Q7CxTO4AX5

      Edit: Link to court document appealing the subpoeana for data – “JOINT MOTION OF NONPARTIES AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS, WORLD PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR TRANSGENDER HEALTH, AND ENDOCRINE SOCIETY TO QUASH RULE 45 SUBPOENAS “

      • Molly 5.3.1
        6 June 2023 at 1:59 pm

        For further information, this was discussed back in April.

        It may be of interest to note that the organisations that we refer to here in NZ for treatment protocols are the same three. (WPATH via PATHA).

        .https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-19-04-2023/#comment-1946321

        • Visubversa 5.3.1.1
          6 June 2023 at 3:19 pm

          I have a suspicion that the main difference is that in the past, the vast majority of trans identified people were same sex attracted.

          These days it is not so easy. I have been in the same Ladies Toilet facility with Georgina Beyer a couple of times at Labour Party Conferences. We were both there for the same reasons, use the facilities, flush, wash our hands and depart. We were not there to snap "bathroom selfies" with a bunch of schoolgirls, to achieve our "gender euphoria" or to steal used sanitary products for menstrual fetishes.

          Nobody then was demanding a right for male bodied people to use changing rooms or locker rooms where women get undressed, or to use the women's section of a Spa. The person in the Wi Spa incident – although vigorously defended by Trans Rights Activists, got dropped like a hot brick when it turned out he was a registered sex offender with past convictions for displaying himself in women's spaces.

          Remember – with self ID – any man can say he is trans.

          • Molly 5.3.1.1.1
            6 June 2023 at 3:25 pm

            The accommodations made in the past for transsexuals – was legislatively enacted, and required legal recognition based on GRS.

            As you mention that distinction no longer is in place with current interpretations of the law, and the introduction of Self-ID.

            However, I would like to point out that there would have been women that self-excluded – for whatever reasons – when they became aware they were expected to share single-sex provisions with a male. We will never know how many did this.

            It is also worthwhile to consider that consent of all women was assumed – when this provision was passed into law. And consent – above all – is not transferable when it comes to adults.

            Our admiration for individuals such as Georgina Beyer, should not overcome basic safeguarding principles that apply to all. It is an uncomfortable position but a necessary one, because good safeguarding practice is not based on emotion.

          • tWiggle 5.3.1.1.2
            6 June 2023 at 10:47 pm

            Oh gosh, Visubversa, maybe the US Wi Spa was not a trans issue, because the person involved was a predator who happened also to be trans.

            One reason it was taken up by the trans community at first was because a perfectly innocent trans woman was incorrectly identified as the predator, after which she was mobbed online from all over the world.

            There are around 100, 000 trans women in California. Are there 100, 000 trans predators in California?

  6. PsyclingLeft.Always 6
    6 June 2023 at 12:56 pm

    ACT, that wants to introduce a two-rate income tax system, bring back charter schools, build more prison beds and reinstate the three strikes system.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/491394/act-preens-as-party-in-waiting-ahead-of-election-2023

    Oh yea…and deny climate change..and dairy NZ contributions to

    On that. I see ex Fed Farm spokes mouth Andrew Hoggard has nailed his dairy shit brown colours to acts mast

    Federated Farmers' president Andrew Hoggard has stepped down from the top role in order to contest this year's election as the ACT party's Rangitīkei candidate.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/country/489565/federated-farmers-president-steps-down-to-contest-election-as-act-s-rangitikei-candidate

    We must beat Nact. NZ and its Future will be fucked else.

  7. Ad 7
    6 June 2023 at 1:15 pm

    Holy Cow I hope we don't lose Michael Wood

    • Sanctuary 7.1
      6 June 2023 at 1:20 pm

      People whorry about how many billboards all that billionaire dosh buys National and ACT. What they should be worried about is how many nasty little right wing shits with comms skills it buys to spend endless days digging for dirt that can be then laundered through the Herald.

      • SPC 7.1.1
        6 June 2023 at 6:00 pm

        In the Key era, NZH trawled for stories off Whaleoil, rather than twitter accounts of NACT operatives.

      • Incognito 7.2.1
        6 June 2023 at 1:38 pm

        This could have been avoided if Wood had off-loaded those shares stat.

        Wood will now be the keenest person in NZ wanting to sell his AIA shares, followed at the heels by Wayne Brown, of course.

        If I were Wood, I would donate the money to a charity and do a mea culpa.

        • arkie 7.2.1.1
          6 June 2023 at 2:00 pm

          Yes, after he has off-loaded them he may be able to return to his previous position:

          Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has stood Michael Wood down as Transport Minister while any remaining issues around his conflicts are resolved.

          https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/491423/transport-minister-michael-wood-stood-down-after-airport-shares-controversy

          More than anything, potential MPs really should be over their investments and potential conflicts before being elected. As you say, could all be easily avoided.

        • Anne 7.2.1.2
          6 June 2023 at 6:29 pm

          " I would donate the money to a charity and do a mea culpa."

          My bet is, that is what he will do.

          As a minister who has one of the heaviest workloads, it is unsurprising he never got around to it. He put his portfolios before a handful of shares he bought nearly 40 years ago!

          It reminds me of the petty-fogging, officious senior public servants I encountered who were more concerned about somebody arriving to work a few minutes late (usually for good reason) than they were on the person's excellent out-put during working hours.

    • Patricia Bremner 7.3
      6 June 2023 at 2:27 pm

      Well we did not lose Key, so why should Michael be pinged?
      Chris, don’t dance to the Rights dirt digging.

      Michael, donate the shares to Women’s Refuge, and apologise to the Prime Minister and House.

  8. adam 8
    6 June 2023 at 2:12 pm

    So this is how we descend into slavery

  9. Ffloyd 9
    6 June 2023 at 4:16 pm

    Friggin annoyed at Chris Hipkins knee jerking to the trifling issue of old shares. Michael Wood should have been spoken to, and his reasons for forgetting to follow up his initial action to sell shares listened to. And then just let him do just that. Sell them. Probably the same reason John key reasoned that he didn’t remember. But then maybe not. Key out and out lied to his tame media and they accepted it Just like that. Super annoyed. Michael Wood is one of the best that Labour has. He stays! However, I am betting that Chris Lux isn’t going to be keys favourite person for a while.

    • observer 9.1
      6 June 2023 at 5:03 pm

      I'm annoyed with Hipkins too. I don't mind Wood being temporarily stood down but I do get impatient with this "deer in the headlights" acceptance of opposition framing. He has to counter-attack. Control the narrative. Challenge Luxon with language like this …

      "I warn the leader of the National party that to play holier-than-thou is a game no politician should play, unless he is surrounded by saints. And he knows he is not."

      "If Mr Luxon believes that making a mistake is a sacking offence, then Mr Luxon should have sacked Mr Luxon by now. He has blamed his own staff for everything from his own social media to candidate selection to campaign tactics. Apparently Mr Luxon is responsible for nothing."

      "If Mr Luxon has already forgotten his own MPs' sins perhaps he would like a list … [provide long list of MPs …]

      And so on, and so on. Who is writing Hipkins' lines? They are weak. FFS, fight back.

      • observer 9.1.1
        6 June 2023 at 5:09 pm

        For example, does anyone remember this "mistake"? Of course not, because Labour never talk about it but if the roles were reversed National would be all over it. And the media would follow …

        https://twitter.com/henrycooke/status/1524219315951906817

      • bwaghorn 9.1.2
        6 June 2023 at 5:39 pm

        ""Apparently Mr Luxon is responsible for nothing

        Well he is management , so he's practiced at shitting on inferior subordinates

      • Anne 9.1.3
        6 June 2023 at 5:58 pm

        Bang on observer.

        I get sick of this pussy-footing around. Michael did nothing much wrong. It seems he requested a stockbroker sell the shares then forgot about them…until he later discovered the stockbroker didn't sell the shares.

        If I recall correctly my 'teenage' shares tanked not long after I bought em and never recovered. Dunno what happened to them but never ventured onto the stock-market again. Life is too short to be f****d about a handful of shares.

        Onya Michael Wood.

      • Alan 9.1.4
        6 June 2023 at 7:08 pm

        Perhaps Hipkins knows more than we do about this matter.

    • Lukas 9.2
      6 June 2023 at 5:37 pm

      Ignoring the six discussions he had with the Cabinet Office – the seventh time was going to be the charm right?

  10. Ad 10
    6 June 2023 at 5:29 pm

    Don't sell Auckland Airport shares!

    Nek minutes…