Open mike 21/11/2022

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 21st, 2022 - 106 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 …

106 comments on “Open mike 21/11/2022 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. pat 1
    21 November 2022 at 7:24 am

    Food for thought

    [unlinked quote deleted]

    Will we remain so?…particularly now QE2 has passed.

    • weka 1.1
      21 November 2022 at 7:45 am

      I deleted your unlinked quote. Feel free to post it again with a link.

    • pat 1.2
      21 November 2022 at 5:28 pm

      Food for thought

      "The problem with written constitutions is that the inevitable conflicts over their interpretation are resolved by unelected lawyers in judges’ robes. And, as anyone who’s been paying attention to US politics recently knows, allowing judges to determine what should and shouldn’t be included among the fundamental rights of citizens, can throw up some very disturbing results.

      With their single house of Parliament, their unwritten – and hence flexible and adaptable – constitution, and their highly efficient electoral machinery, New Zealanders are the masters of their own destiny to a degree unencountered among many peoples. Our courts cannot strike down legislation passed by the House of Representatives, nor can one Parliament bind another – both prohibitions guaranteeing a radically majoritarian mode of government. If the essence of democracy consists of giving effect to the will of the majority, then New Zealand must rank as one of the most democratic nations on Earth"

      https://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2022/11/if-it-aint-broke-why-fix-it.html

      Will we remain so?…particularly now QE2 has passed.

  2. Jenny are we there yet 2
    21 November 2022 at 8:49 am

    Another problem caused by the empty home hoarding parasites.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/ghost-houses-increasing-why-are-40000-homes-lying-vacant-in-auckland/MD7REG67TBCIWB2NITGJCH5SH4/

    As speculators are now buying into lower decile areas and leaving the houses empty. House alarms that blare continuously for days unattended.

  3. Ad 3
    21 November 2022 at 10:08 am

    Anyone here from the Waitaki electorate?

    Also does anyone have a link to the booth-by-booth breakdown of voting from the 2020 election … especially for Waitaki?

    • weka 3.1
      21 November 2022 at 10:17 am

      not sure if they do that now because of postal voting.

      • Ad 3.1.1
        21 November 2022 at 10:28 am

        Waitaki as central government electorate of course they do.

        • weka 3.1.1.1
          21 November 2022 at 10:31 am

          I mean publishing them for the general public. I just looked again, couldn't find it. I've looked in the past too. Let me know if you find it. Might need to ask the EC or whoever directly.

      • Ad 3.2.1
        21 November 2022 at 11:02 am

        That is exactly what I wanted thankyou Graeme.

        There's also a spatial map version around but it's more useful within cities.

        Just gearing my mind to the political landscape, and also trying to find good Labour people in WakandaWanaka.

        • Graeme 3.2.1.1
          21 November 2022 at 1:11 pm

          We're split between the two electorates, Whakatipu is in Southland, but the rest of Central is Waitaki. There's quite a bit of commonality in the Whakatipu / Southland situation, but sfa between Cromwell and Oamaru, was in early 80's when the dam was starting, but not now.

          Central Otago will be a seperate electorate at the next review, if the Electoral Commission can figure out how to carve up the rest of South Island. Unfortunately I can't see an outcome that makes more red electorates, just lots much bluer ones. Central would unfortunately be a very deep shade of blue.

  4. ianmac 4
    21 November 2022 at 10:28 am

    I find this column impossible to understand. Anyone?

    The Three Waters reforms, Covid Recovery Fund, Provincial Growth Fund, Māori health and education – there's an urgent need to take action on the lack of accountability to New Zealanders, says Auditor-General John Ryan

    “I don’t trust CEOs of government agencies… you want trust, you gotta earn it, front up.”

    That was the damning assessment from one participant in a study commissioned by the Auditor-General this year, as his office warns of widespread failings in the public accountability of government.

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/auditor-general-calls-for-wide-reaching-reviews-of-failing-public-accountability?utm_source=Friends+of+the+Newsroom&utm_campaign=4e7ff8f90f-Daily_Briefing+21.11.2022&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_71de5c4b35-4e7ff8f90f-95522477

    • Ad 4.1
      21 November 2022 at 11:14 am

      Crikey damning as a sample of Maori interviewees.

      Why did he leave it so late into the 3 Waters legislative process?

      If I were Mahuta I would be having a WTF chat with the Auditor General and Hipkins as House manager on a process level. Treasury at least should have warned government this was coming.

      But even if you found an alternative to the structural relationship between state corporations and the citizen that causes distrust, would that improve trust?

      Or is public trust needed in public corporations when we are far more customers than we are citizens? You get what you pay for not what you engage with. Not a fun conclusion but there's no structural reset on anyone's horizon.

      No one appears willing to undo the Public Finance Act, or de-corporatise public utilities and services. On the contrary COVID appears to have accelerated it through health.

      • ianmac 4.1.1
        21 November 2022 at 1:14 pm

        It looks more like a political statement rather than a formal report. Wonder how the criteria for success or failure is measured?

        • Ad 4.1.1.1
          21 November 2022 at 1:57 pm

          Hard to avoid the political lens.

          Success for the Auditor General would surely be: some extra accountability clause in the 3 Waters bill, on top of the Select Committee ones already added in there.

          For example each water entity required to front to Select Committee every year. Or something.

  5. Poission 5
    21 November 2022 at 11:34 am

    The AG letter to the speakers was last week,following his report to Parliament.

    On 27 October when I appeared in front of the Committee, some members expressed concerns about a lack of transparency and accountability over the spending of public money on new initiatives. I share these concerns and I offered to write to the Committee summarising my views on this.

    It is difficult, and often not possible, to track spending and what is being achieved

    I am concerned by the slow progress in providing this clarity in the reporting requirements. The Public Service Act has been in place since 2020, and five interdepartmental executive boards (IEBs) have been established under the Act. I understand that the Treasury is currently working on publishing the reporting requirements that apply.

    https://www.oag.parliament.nz/2022/accountability-concerns?utm_source=Subs&utm_medium=Subs&utm_campaign=OPC+letter

    Essentially what the AG has persistently found is an absence of Transparency in reporting , no review method for inadequate reporting,follow the money trails are difficult to understand (especially from suppling funding without adequate measurement.

    Higher risk's of corruption then are open etc.

  6. observer 6
    21 November 2022 at 12:01 pm

    A National party insider calls for Nats to scrap their tax policy, especially the top rate cut:

    https://www.patreon.com/posts/its-time-for-to-74414030

    Not a lone voice, and if Luxon has any sense (debatable) he'll stop giving Ardern the free gift of "you want to give the wealthiest everything and the poorest next to nothing".

    Confident prediction for 2023: the policy will get dumped by National, or Luxon will. Or both.

    • AB 6.1
      21 November 2022 at 12:18 pm

      The purpose of the National party is to redistribute wealth upwards (or at a minimum prevent its redistribution downwards). Without cutting top tax rates it will need to find other ways to do this. The options would include state asset sales, re-inflating the housing market by stripping out brightline tests and turning on the immigration tap), lowering wages that employers have to pay (immigration tap open, repealing Fair Pay legislation), and so on. Would it be enough though? I can see them delaying tax cuts as a promise for Term 2 after a Term 1 of cost-cutting austerity, i.e. the tax cuts become a reward for the well-off to compensate for the pain that was mostly felt by other people (the less well off) during the austerity phase.

  7. Tiger Mountain 7
    21 November 2022 at 1:15 pm

    Some of our reactionary conservative, anti Māori, multiple property owning brethren will likely be bricking themselves over this ruling…
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/479175/supreme-court-rules-in-favour-of-make-it-16-to-lower-voting-age

    • Ad 7.1
      21 November 2022 at 1:54 pm

      We probably need an upper age limit as well. In the category Two legs good, three legs bad.

      Snowball in Animal Farm: "No animal shall drink alcohol. No animal shall sleep in a bed. Four legs good, two legs bad."

      Sphinx to Oedipus: "What walks on four legs in the morning, two legs in the afternoon, three legs in the evening, and no legs at night?"

      • Tiger Mountain 7.1.1
        21 November 2022 at 3:23 pm

        Lets not go through the whole debate for our purposes here in Open Mike.

        Being non compos mentis likely affects few people’s ability to vote unless they are medically obviously not able to drag their arses to a booth, or get assistance with early voting. Those unaware of, or not on the non published roll however, are likely in greater numbers–women, debtors etc. Another pool of voters like the “off the grids” that should be enticed and supported to become involved in that basic level of democratic participation.

        Age 16–18 should not be a barrier either, including some societal education and support if the legislation were to be enacted.

        • Ad 7.1.1.1
          21 November 2022 at 4:31 pm

          Debate is coming whether you want it or not to Parliament.

          PM is signalling legislation will be introduced and it will be a conscience vote.

    • Alan 7.2
      21 November 2022 at 1:58 pm

      Lets extend that 16 years old parameter to drinking age and adult court age for those caught committing crime – what could possibly go wrong?????

      • Ad 7.2.1
        21 November 2022 at 3:19 pm

        They make everyone re-sit their drivers' license after 80, to make sure they're not drooling on the handbrake.

        You could start with compulsory voter restrictions for everyone in rest home hospital-level care then to all with an EPOA and work backwards to 'can't put on their shoes'.

        • Herodotus 7.2.1.1
          21 November 2022 at 5:49 pm

          Great come back (Not) – FFS.

          With the responsibility to vote goes IMO all other aspects of being an adult (18 in general terms in NZ). Let 16 years replace being of age appropriate for more "rights" (refer below link) ?? Or is voting at 16 age but other "adult" rights are not age suitable ??

          How about those under 25 that are still dependant upon parents incomes to be eligible for an allowance, etc. Come on PM how about aligning 16 to the age for all "adult" age levels ??

          https://www.studylink.govt.nz/products/a-z-products/student-allowance/2-parents.html

    • DS 7.3
      21 November 2022 at 6:13 pm

      I am neither conservative, nor anti-Maori, nor property owning, and I think this is an idiotic development on two levels.

      1. I oppose lowering the voting age, on the basis that 16 year olds (in school, and living at home) are more vulnerable to external influence. If we're going with taxation and representation, 8 year olds pay tax, and that is not an argument for 8 year olds voting. 18 is a somewhat arbitrary cut-off, sure, but then so is 16.

      2. The Supreme Court is frankly violating the norms of parliamentary sovereignty here. This is not the USA, where courts make policy decisions all the time, and invent laws to justify their own biased nonsense. This is the sort of issue to be resolved via a proper debate within wider New Zealand, not a debate via an unelected and unaccountable judiciary imposing political decisions upon us. NZBORA was never intended to be that.

      • Incognito 7.3.1
        21 November 2022 at 6:28 pm

        I don’t follow. The NZ Courts can only point out inconsistencies in legislation, AFAIK, and not dictate Parliament. They either show a clear path or an obstacle.

        • observer 7.3.1.1
          21 November 2022 at 6:46 pm

          Correct. The Supreme Court is not violating anything. Parliament will respond and (very probably) the current law (age) will remain … for now.

          But it is in the political arena, and like many issues in the "too hard basket" (marriage equality, abortion) it will eventually be taken out of the basket … and of course in years to come everyone will pretend it was never in there!

        • DS 7.3.1.2
          21 November 2022 at 8:51 pm

          Decreeing that a voting age of 18 (in place since 1974) is inconsistent with NZBORA (in place since 1990) in 2022 is a nakedly political act on the part of the judiciary here.

          It's a sign (along with the nonsense about vaccine mandates somehow breaching fundamental human rights) that NZBORA needs to go.

  8. weka 8
    21 November 2022 at 2:17 pm

    I cannot wait until Peters is no longer able to stand for parliament and we don't have to put up with this democracy munting bullshit.

    https://twitter.com/ClintVSmith/status/1594476152877301761

    • Corey Humm 8.1
      21 November 2022 at 5:09 pm

      Ruling out Labour is a dumb move on Winston's behalf.

      He has always benefited from being able to go with either side, he has always said making statements about potential coalition partners before the votes are counted was stupid.

      A lot of lefty's refuse to accept it but he has in the past got a load of votes from angry labour supporters, people who may want a labour govt but want a handbrake on labours social policies and that even if he didn't go with labour he'd also be a handbrake to the right in immigration and privatization.

      By ruling one side out he's not gonna get the angry labour voters and many of the right wing voters he wants to court will blame him for putting labour in power in the first place.

      Silly move. Playing both sides of the fence has always been his strength.

      My hope is that he sucks as many right wing votes from nat/act as possible but only gets 4.7% of the vote and no electorate seat.

      A lot of anti immigration/nationalist populists are bizarrely supporting act right because they don't seem to know that act is in favor of hyper immigration and privatization and foreign ownership. Winston should be able to steal those voters off act and hopefully not break 5% and a few % will make or break this election

      • Louis 8.1.1
        21 November 2022 at 5:36 pm

        imo any angry Labour voter would vote Green, not Winston Peters.

        • weka 8.1.1.1
          21 November 2022 at 6:04 pm

          My Dad was a swing voter between NZF and Labour. He was rightly angry at Peters' betrayal with the election where he went with National after implying he would go with Labour. Vote Labour in the next few elections. Not sure how long for, but he loved Ardern so voted Labour in the last two. If he was fucked off with Labour I can't imagine him voting Green.

          • Louis 8.1.1.1.1
            21 November 2022 at 9:44 pm

            Neither can I when he has voted NZF in the past. I'm the opposite, I could never vote for NZF. I have voted Greens in the past.

      • weka 8.1.2
        21 November 2022 at 6:06 pm

        My Dad was an intermittent NZF voter who would swing to Labour and back, I'm aware of the dynamic and issues.

        As b points out below, Peters didn't rule out Labour, he's just playing the same old bullshit game.

    • bwaghorn 8.2
      21 November 2022 at 5:12 pm

      https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/luxon-won-t-rule-out-nz-first-coalition-after-peters-says-no-to-current-labour-party/ar-AA14lh4t?cvid=789dada705e34a9aea9ab7b74b6c7e4e&ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover

      Of interest is cunning old Winston says" HE WONT WORK WITH CURRENT LABOUR PARTY"

      after the election labour won't be the current labour party they'll be the newly elected labour government,thats more than enough wriggle room for the old northland tuna to slip through

  9. roblogic 9
    21 November 2022 at 4:54 pm

    Absolutely tragic news out of America… a mass shooting at a gay nightclub in Colorado Springs.

    Some are taking this as a reason for "hate speech" legislation.

    I take it as a reason for proper gun control legislation.

    https://twitter.com/roblogic_/status/1594506589418885120?s=20&t=Vh6CPTxJZbG-O8lKSXpJ6w

    • Sabine 9.1
      21 November 2022 at 5:15 pm

      Since the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting i ruled the regulations of private weapons in the US out. That was babies being shot to pieces and it changed nothing. The political will is not there.

    • arkie 9.2
      21 November 2022 at 5:27 pm

      ¿Por qué no los dos?

      In response to the shooting, President Biden again called on elected officials to take action to stop gun violence and reiterated the need for a ban on assault weapons. He also lamented that the shooting joins other violent attacks on the LGBTQ community, including the 2016 attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, and against transgender women.

      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colorado-springs-mass-shooting-club-q/

      • Molly 9.2.1
        21 November 2022 at 7:01 pm

        "…other violent attacks on the LGBTQ community, including the 2016 attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, and against transgender women."

        Wasn't The Pulse nightclub incident also a gay nightclub, making the target in both incidents gay men?

        Why do you think Biden added "…and against transgender women."?

        Have there been similar targeted attacks against trans-identified males?

        • Sabine 9.2.1.1
          21 November 2022 at 7:08 pm

          If this was a club for the alphabet community chances are that transwomen would very well have been present in a gay club as many of them are gay.

        • Drowsy M. Kram 9.2.1.2
          21 November 2022 at 9:43 pm

          He also lamented that the shooting joins other violent attacks on the LGBTQ community, including the 2016 attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, and against transgender women.

          I could be wrong, but it's possible Biden was taking this opportunity to empathise with and express sympathy for members of minority communities who have been violently attacked. Maybe too 'woke' for some – politicians walk a fine line.

          Consider:

          He also lamented that the shooting joins other violent attacks on the LGBTQ community, including [1:] the 2016 attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, and [2: attacks] against transgender women [as members of the LGBTQ community].

          The shooting came during Transgender Awareness Week and hours before Sunday's International Transgender Day of Remembrance, when events around the world are held to mourn and remember transgender people lost to violence.

          Why Biden specified "transgender women", instead of "transgender men" or "transgender people" is a mystery. It might make sense if transgender women are victims of violence more often than transgender people in toto, but I don't know if that's the case.

          The previous month, a fundamentalist Idaho pastor told his small Boise congregation that gay, lesbian and transgender people should be executed by the government, which lined up with similar sermons from a Texas fundamentalist pastor.

          Quotes are from arkie's link @9.2 – the emphasis is mine.

          • Molly 9.2.1.2.1
            22 November 2022 at 7:45 am

            There are a few lists maintained online:

            One I linked t above:

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_killed_for_being_transgender

            UK specific: https://kareningalasmith.com/2021/04/21/counting-dead-trans-people/

            (The name might seem harsh, but the list was compiled after demands when the author was criticised after maintaining a list named Counting Dead Women.)

            Wider scope: LGBT people:

            ttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acts_of_violence_against_LGBT_people

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_violence_against_LGBT_people_in_the_United_States

            I'm sure as with all such lists there are omissions. I believe its always necessary to put such statements as Biden's in context and perspective.

            • Drowsy M. Kram 9.2.1.2.1.1
              22 November 2022 at 10:26 am

              Context and perspective(s) are important – whether they’re "always necessary" for every statement is a matter for debate, but we all have our obsessions.

              Reporting on these particular sentiments is a case in point – lamenting violent attacks on members of minority communities (an expression of sympathy and/or empathy for what some members of these communities go through?) is something that all decent, empathetic people could get behind, imho.

              • Molly …
                22 November 2022 at 12:38 pm

                "Context and perspective(s) are important – whether they’re "always necessary" for every statement is a matter for debate, but we all have our obsessions."

                I am concerned with this continual repetition of the vulnerability of transwomen in particular, not because expressions of concern are to be denied, but this automatic repetition has played a big part in legislative, policy and institutional changes that have significant impacts on society, but most particularly on women and girls.

                So, yes, I approach all promoted comments regarding this with scrutiny.

                "Reporting on these particular sentiments is a case in point – lamenting violent attacks on members of minority communities (an expression of sympathy and/or empathy for what some members of these communities go through?) is something that all decent, empathetic people could get behind, imho."

                arkie chose that particular paragraph – without knowing the details – to repeat the narrative given above. That transgender women are fundamentally victims of hate. So, I questioned that certainty.

                To draw immediate conclusions when so little is known, is not the act of empathy or decency either.

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  22 November 2022 at 1:20 pm

                  To draw immediate conclusions when so little is known, is not the act of empathy or decency either.

                  Imho, some will resist empathising with gay, lesbian and transgender people with every fibre of their being – won't matter to them how much time has passed or how much more is known.

                  The previous month, a fundamentalist Idaho pastor told his small Boise congregation that gay, lesbian and transgender people should be executed by the government, which lined up with similar sermons from a Texas fundamentalist pastor.

                  Not Biden though – good for him.

                  https://pl.usembassy.gov/president_transgender_day/

                  • Molly …
                    22 November 2022 at 2:37 pm

                    I'm going to reply to this, in regards to Biden's remarks and because it is a necessary discussion given that we are currently looking at legislation that seeks to unequivocally and definitively provide a prosecutable recognition of "hate"

                    The recent attack on Club Q can be rightly called a hateful incident, but until more details are known it is premature to call it or even casually refer to it as a hate crime.

                    As further details come to light, (and if the perpetrator provides believable testimony regarding motivation), then this might be classed as a hate crime, but I am not aware that this is the case here.

                    It is important to maintain that distinction despite the inclination to make this assumption. Delaying that declaration until more is known respects the victims of the crime, by not reducing them to a message for political purpose, as Biden appeared to do.

                    (The fundmentalist pastor sounds like an idiot, and I would hope he is prosecuted under whatever laws apply for wherever he is.)

                    But Biden is the POTUS and his words carry immense authority and influence.

                    As mentioned, it is hard to tell whether the addition of "… and against transwomen" was an incomplete reference, or a knowledgeable recognition that amongst the victims were transwomen. But even that is a stretch.

                    What it appears to be, is the taking of an opportunity caused by a heinous incident, to promote the vulnerability not of transgender children, or transmen – but specifically transwomen.

                    Why do you think this group was singled out from the rest of the transgender community?

                    (When this message is promulgating unthinkingly and without evidence it sets the environment for the breaking of single-sex boundaries without question. And that is having significant impacts.)

                    That is why I respectfully and decisively hold the line on this narrative. The narrative – until it is confirmed – has nothing to do with the hateful crime committed.

                    Empathy, support and decency that can and should be extended to the victims and their loved ones without that premature label.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      22 November 2022 at 3:56 pm

                      Whether or not this is a hate crime, and whether or not hate speech contributed to the mass murderer's ideation and actions, will be for others to determine.

                      I'm just pleased that Biden chose to lament this and other attacks that have resulted in the deaths of gay, lesbian and transgender people – his is an entirely appropriate response, imho.

                      I respect your reasons and need to "decisively hold the line on this narrative", just as I respect Biden for his empathetic 'narrative'.

                      What we know so far about the Colorado Springs shooting [21 Nov. 2022]
                      The shooting came on the eve of Transgender Day of Remembrance

                      Among those who were fatally shot on Saturday was Daniel Aston, 28, a transgender man who bartended and frequently performed at Club Q. Aston loved 1980s music and hats, his mother told Colorado Public Radio.

                      She admitted that in the past, she was often worried of her son being targeting for being transgender.

                      "I always worried about it," she said. "He's a trans man and the trans community are really the biggest targets I can think about it right now."

                      Who could fail to feel sympathy and empathy for Daniel Aston's mother – you'd have to have a heart of stone.

                      The fundmentalist pastor sounds like an idiot, and I would hope he is prosecuted under whatever laws apply for wherever he is.

                      Yep, hate-filled idiots – they’re everwhere. Good luck prosecuting them in some US states though – free speech etc.

                    • Molly …
                      22 November 2022 at 6:01 pm

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      ""I always worried about it," she said. "He's a trans man and the trans community are really the biggest targets I can think about it right now.""

                      This mother faces the senseless and immediate loss of her child, and she should be supported, however her heartfelt fears are also not evidence of increased vulnerability.

                      That's what statistics are for, and statistics show otherwise.

                      This relentless narrative of persecution despite lack of evidence is not healthy for transgender people, especially those who have other well-being issues. Entwined with the familiar suicidal ideation, it's a catastrophe for many transgender people.

                      I believe the approach taken by Biden is a harmful one for all these reasons, but I guess it essentially comes down to one question:

                      Is is true?

                      If it is, then Biden and anyone else who joins is right to condemn.

                    • Molly …
                      22 November 2022 at 6:43 pm

                      The BBC have released details about the five victims:

                      https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63705862

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      22 November 2022 at 7:02 pm

                      This relentless narrative of persecution despite lack of evidence is not healthy for transgender people, especially those who have other well-being issues. Entwined with the familiar suicidal ideation, it's a catastrophe for many transgender people.

                      Why would transgender people be any less persecuted than other minorities have been, and still are, for sexual orientation, race, etc.?

                      I think we've reached the point of 'agree to disagree'.

                      You will have your reasons for believing that there is a "lack of evidence" for the "persecution" of transgender people. We may never know if Daniel Aston would have agreed with you – all we have to go on for now are the heartfelt words of his bereaved mother.

                      Whether "suicidal ideation" is relevant to Aston's murder (or that of transgender woman Kelly Loving – thanks for the BBC link) is a matter of speculation. What is absolutely certain is that bullets were "not healthy" for Aston, Rump, Loving, Paugh, Green and several others at Club Q that night – rather, they were "a catastrophe".

                    • Molly …
                      22 November 2022 at 10:35 pm

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      "You will have your reasons for believing that there is a "lack of evidence" for the "persecution" of transgender people. "

                      The reason being, that there is none. If you are prepared to provide some then, go ahead. At present, in terms of assault and homicides transgender people are a fairly safe demographic.

                      That does not mean they are immune from violent acts, just that statistically they are not more likely than any other group to be the victim.

                      One of the researchers for the Counting Ourselves report repeats the persecution line:

                      "“Sexual violence is about power and control,” Jack Byrne, one of the ‘Counting Ourselves’ researchers and a trans man, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

                      “If the world tells you that nobody loves and cares for you that puts huge levels of pressure on you and (increases your) vulnerability to be preyed upon.”

                      Why is the messaging that nobody loves you most often coming from advocates and allies?

                      If you get a chance look at the website and really see what hard data is provided.

                      https://countingourselves.nz/2018-survey-report/

                      "What is absolutely certain is that bullets were "not healthy" for Aston, Rump, Loving, Paugh, Green and several others at Club Q that night – rather, they were "a catastrophe"."

                      I don't know where the quotes are from.

                      Once more, the attack Club Q is rightly condemned. They may, or may not, get a credible motivation from the perpetrator. It is likely he has some grievance against homosexuals, but it is currently not known.

                      What is being discussed here, is Biden using the incident to repeat a narrative that has little evidence to support it. As you are so vehement that this was the right call, perhaps you will provide it.

                      To put into context. A triple murder trial concluded last week for a triple-homicide that took place in 2016.

                      The victims were a married, mixed race lesbian couple with an adopted teenage son.

                      The son had been shot,, the women stabbed and shot and attempts were made to burn their bodies.

                      Now, is this homicide:

                      1. Homophobic – with the son being caught up in the incident,

                      2. Misogynistic – with the son being caught up in the incident,

                      3. Race based – with the non-person of colour caught up in the incident,

                      4. Religious fervour – against same-sex marriage, etc.

                      The perpetrator was known to them, but not an acquaintance. This was a hateful crime – but was it a hate crime?

                      It seems not.

                      It appears that the women were killed because they were lesbians, but most specfically – they were lesbians that were involved in organising the annual lesbian MichFest and they maintained the single-sex admission criteria, despite pressure from transwomen activists over the years. The homicide happened AFTER the women gave up the battle, and withdrew their organisational labour resulting not in the admittance of transwomen to the festival, but the cessation of the festival altogether.

                      This strikes me as pure narcissistic rage that the outcome that had been sought had been thwarted. You can read details here.

                      The relevant part of this story, is that due to the accepted narrative of the vulnerability of transwomen, this convicted murderer has been, and continues to be held in a women's prison.

                      These decisions need to make sense, and be backed by robust data and evidence. But instead they are informed by such narratives as the one apparently spouted by Biden (though I acknowledge as president he might have had some intelligence that was not public).

                      These messages of persecution, are not benign.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      23 November 2022 at 6:37 am

                      @Molly – as I wrote @7:02 pm yesterday, I think we've reached the point of 'agree to disagree', as confirmed by your comment @10:35 pm, and my response here.

                      Re the start of this thread @9.2, I believe Biden's effort to empathise with and express sympathy for members of (minority) LGBT communities who have been victimised (and their loved ones), by way of lamenting the murderous attack on people at Club Q, is good.

                      You would exclude transgender people ("Drop the T"?) from any list of individuals/groups who/that have been persecuted for their behaviour, but persecuted some have been, consistent with the links below and with my halting efforts to empathise with trans people.

                      Helping trans people escape death in their home countries [7 Dec 2021]

                      The Morrison Government’s Targeted Persecution of Transgender People [11 March 2022]

                      Forcibly displaced LGBT persons face major challenges in search of safe haven
                      International Day against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia – 17 May 2022

                      Transgender Experiences in Weimar and Nazi Germany [3 June 2022]

                      The persecution of M-F crossing in imperial China [27 July 2022]

                      Gender Persecution
                      Strengthening International Norms to Ensure Accountability

                      Transgender people come from all walks of life, and HRC Foundation has estimated that there are more than 2 million of us across the United States. We are parents, siblings, and kids. We are your coworkers, your neighbors, and your friends.

                      The transgender community is composed of people – just human, like you and me, and as such more or less susceptible to harrassment, discrimination and even persecution.

                      That does not mean they are immune from violent acts, just that statistically they are not more likely than any other group to be the victim.

                      Re "the persecution line", persecution is not necessarily a statistical phenomenon – what does 'persecution' mean to you?

                      What is being discussed here, is Biden using the incident to repeat a narrative that has little evidence to support it. As you are so vehement that this was the right call, perhaps you will provide it.

                      You describe my opinion of Biden's 'use' of "the incident" as "vehement" (I would prefer 'firm', naturally), but is it really any more vehement than yours? After all, except for the purposes of quoting, I've avoided phrases such as "pure narcissistic rage" and words like "catastrophe" and "spouted" – phrases and words that betray perhaps a trace of fervour on your part. Not that there's anything wrong with a bit of earnest vehemence/fervour/firmness now and then, imho.

                      I sincerely hope that Kiwis engaged in the spiralling 'gender wars' (for want of a better term) can negotiate an armistice – I'd feel uneasy if DeSantis-style rhetoric ever became mainstream in NZ.

                      We reject woke ideology.
                      We fight the woke in the legislature.
                      We fight the woke in the schools.
                      We fight the woke in the corporations.
                      We will never ever surrender to the woke mob.

                      Aotearoa New Zealand is where woke goes to die!??

                      "A dream to some. A nightmare to others!"

                    • Molly …
                      23 November 2022 at 8:01 am

                      @Drowsy M Kram

                      Thank you for taking the time to provide links.

                      You have however, provided examples of the narrative not harm. A few of your more contemporary links conflate a group of demographics together, including women and so is talking about violence experienced by everybody but straight men without a declared gender identity.

                      There are countries where persecution of gay and transgender people is violent and supported/perpetuated by authorities.

                      Biden's USA is not one of them,

                      Nor is NZ .

                      Investigate for yourself the court appearances or records of assault in our media.

                      Iraq continues to execute homosexuals, but provides free full gender reassignment surgery.

                      Is that a crime against the LGBTQ+, or will you at least concede that this is an extreme form of gay conversion therapy?

                      Your selective misrepresentation (by reuse out of context) of my word choice, continued references to tone, and my failure to emphathise studiously avoids the content of what I am saying.

                      You provided no statistical evidence of harm, you also do not engage in the points put forward for discussion.

                      Human empathy, and dignity is based is truth.

                      Your approach creates an environment where truth is willfully discarded.

                    • arkie …
                      23 November 2022 at 11:29 am

                      The shooter in Colorado was stopped by an unarmed veteran and a transwoman, not a drag queen as reported in NYT

                      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/colorado-springs-club-q-hero-gunman-b2230055.html

                      As to the question:

                      Do sexual and gender minorities (SGMs) in the United States encounter disproportionate rates of victimization as compared with their cisgender, heterosexual counterparts?

                      …

                      The rate of violent victimization for SGMs is 71.1 victimizations per 1000 people compared with 19.2 victimizations per 1000 people for those who are not SGMs. SGMs are 2.7 times more likely to be a victim of violent crime than non-SGMs. These findings raise the importance of further considering sexual orientation and gender identity in victimization and interventions.

                      https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aba6910 (my bold)

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      23 November 2022 at 1:51 pm

                      Thanks arkie (@11:29 am)

                      Your selective misrepresentation (by reuse out of context) of my word choice, continued references to tone, and my failure to emphathise studiously avoids the content of what I am saying.

                      @Molly, I've read all your comments in this thread – I’m simply expressing my opinion about Biden's position as reported @9.2.

                      For the record, I vehemently deny your accusation of "continued references to tone".

                      I mentioned sympathy/empathy in comments by way of explanation. I regret that you feel I was suggesting that you failed to “emphathise” with victims of the Club Q shooting – that was not my intent. But those idiot pastors in Idaho and Texas, eh?

                      Human empathy, and dignity is based is truth.

                      On that we can agree.

                      Your approach creates an environment where truth is willfully discarded.

                      On that we must agree to disagree, and I'm sorry you feel this way.

                      Brandon Wolf, a survivor of the 2018 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, has spoken to the harm of "manufactured hysteria" in the US – Biden's expression of sympathy/empathy for the Club Q shooting victims, and their loved ones, won't resonate with everyone, but it struck a chord with me – and hopefully not only me.

                      A shooting survivor in Orlando says healing will take time and resources [22 Nov. 2022]

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      23 November 2022 at 2:02 pm

                      Oops, 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida.

                    • Molly …
                      23 November 2022 at 3:42 pm

                      @arkie

                      Your link – once again – relates to an amalgamation of sexual orientatin and gender identity.

                      The stats that have been compiled by transgender allies and often referenced on Trans Remembrance Day are here:

                      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_killed_for_being_transgender

                      Every death a tragedy, but few in number no matter how you look at it.

                      However, let's take a brief look..

                      Between the years 2004-2019 32 victtms recorded worldwide.

                      During the same period:

                      Between 2004 and 2019, there have been 139 victims under the age of 15 in New Zealand alone

                      https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/the-homicide-report/index.html

                      Do we hold a Child Remembrance Day?

                      @Drowsy M.Kram

                      Biden's “expression of sympathy” was coupled with a narrative that you continually fail to substantiate even while admiring it. It appears that your verification method is someone nice said something nice, so it must be true. You post examples of further narrative to support other narrative, not evidence of harm for the specific group of transgender women.

                      An example is the entirety of your last link:

                      "People gathered in Orlando, Florida on Sunday for a vigil to show solidarity with the victims of the Club Q shooting in Colorado Springs. In 2016, Pulse, a gay nighclub in Orlando, was the scene of another horrific mass shooting. Brandon Wolf survived that shooting and said he plans to offer support to the survivors in Colorado Springs. Wolf said the Pulse shooting propelled him to become a full-time activist for “Equality Florida,” an LGBTQ civil rights organization."

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      23 November 2022 at 4:45 pm

                      An example is the entirety of your last link

                      That quote is only the start – the link also contains a 7 minute audio file of an interview with Wolf.

                      Biden's “expression of sympathy” was coupled with a narrative that you continually fail to substantiate even while admiring it.

                      @Molly – substantiating this 'narrative' that you find so objectionable is on Biden. I can and do appreciate his stance, as reported @9.2, for the sympathy, empathy and compassion it shows.

                      I also have compassion for adults and children who strive (and struggle, for any number of reasons) to find their way in the world (those in the US more than some).

                      Joe Biden calls for end to anti-LGBTQ violence in wake of Colorado shooting
                      Joe Biden and Hilary Clinton share tributes to Colorado shooting victims and call for an end to LGBTQ+ hate.

                      Ocasio-Cortez quote-tweeted Boebert’s statement on the Colorado shooting, stating: “you have played a major role in elevating anti-LGBT+ hate rhetoric and anti-trans lies while spending your time in Congress blocking even the most common sense gun safety laws.”

                      Club Q in Colorado Springs was LGBTQ beacon amid anti-gay perceptions
                      But after 21 years, Club Q remained, becoming not only one of a couple dedicated LGBTQ+ venues in a conservative Colorado stronghold, but also one of its most steadfast.

                      Now even its fate is uncertain as it reckons with Saturday’s tragedy.

                      “To be honest, I don’t think we’re ever going to get over this,” Gallagher said.

                      What path will you take?

                      You post examples of further narrative to support other narrative, not evidence of harm for the specific group of transgender women.

                      If you can’t see the evidence of harm to transgender women, then we will probably continue to talk past each other.

                    • Molly …
                      23 November 2022 at 5:59 pm

                      @Drowsy M.Kram

                      A plugin must've stopped the video from appearing, because all I had was the paragraph, so that makes sense.

                      We are not talking past each other. You have continued to support the narrative that Biden promulgated that transgender women are vulnerable to violence. You have been given eight opportunities to provide evidence of this claim, and failed to do so.

                      Conversely, I have provided evidence to you of the recorded violence against transgender people, that has been compiled by those who consider this recording (as I do) important.
                      It shows a different reality. One you won’t even acknowledge. Why?

                      Biden could have expressed sympathy for the victims, without creating a narrative when information was not available to support it.

                      Like the mayor of Colorado Springs took care to say after the shooting:

                      "Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers told ABC News that the suspect "had considerable ammo" and "was extremely well armed" when they allegedly walked into Club Q. While a motive remains under investigation, Suthers said "it has the trappings of a hate crime."

                      "But we're going to have to see what the investigation shows in terms of, you know, social media and things like that to make a clear determination exactly what the motive was," the mayor said in an interview on Monday."

                      https://abcnews.go.com/US/colorado-lgbtq-club-shooting-suspect-held-murder-hate/story?id=93776669

                      The Federal Office was equally circumspect:

                      "While the suspect is already facing state charges, numerous federal agencies and offices, including the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, are aware of the shooting, the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Colorado said in a statement Monday. The office said it would “review all available facts of the incident to determine what federal response is warranted.”

                      https://edition.cnn.com/2022/11/21/us/anderson-lee-aldrich-colorado-springs-shooting-suspect/index.html

                      To me this is respectful, empathetic and provides dignity to victims, survivors and loved ones. When information is not yet available, you don't make assumptions.

                      By the by, when you were unsuccessfully looking for links of evidence of harm, and had to resort to links of narratives of harm, did it occur to you that statements such as Biden's have created an instant assertion that transwomen are a vulnerable minority, even though you have been unable to find evidence of this?

                      It’s a reaction that has been cultivated by links such as those you have provided.

                      Now, if transwomen are considered even more vulnerable than dead children in NZ, what impact does that have on public discussion, legislation and policy?

                      Well, perhaps it means that women who request confirmation that single-sex spaces, provisions, services etc remain single-sex are considered obsessive bigots for putting restrictions on the demands of transwomen to be included – because everybody "knows" how vulnerable transgender women are.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      23 November 2022 at 9:06 pm

                      A plugin must’ve stopped the video from appearing, because all I had was the paragraph, so that makes sense.

                      It’s not an autoplay audio file. Try clicking on the circled triangle, in the red-orange rectangle containing the text “LISTEN NOW”, immediately to the right of the headline.

                      We are not talking past each other.

                      @Molly – imho we are, in that this exchange has exposed "an unbridgeable gulf between their [our] respective perceptions".

                      Here is the relevant quote reporting Biden's response (see @9.2)

                      He [Biden] also lamented that the shooting joins other violent attacks on the LGBTQ community, including the 2016 attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, and against transgender women.

                      The report in the link @9.2 continues with an actual Biden quote:

                      "Places that are supposed to be safe spaces of acceptance and celebration should never be turned into places of terror and violence. Yet it happens far too often," he said in a statement. "We must drive out the inequities that contribute to violence against LGBTQI+ people. We cannot and must not tolerate hate."

                      You perceived Biden's reported response as constituting a 'narrative' (formulated by you) "that transgender women are vulnerable to violence", whereas I perceived "Biden was taking this opportunity to empathise with and express sympathy for members of minority communities who have been violently attacked." (see @9.2.1.2)

                      Since we disagree on Biden's intent (each seeing what we want to see), I hope (for a third time) that we can agree to disagree. Perhaps consider that this exchange would have been briefer but for the use of the term "transgender women" in the report excerpt @9.2.

                      Re your narrative, the mass murder at Club Q shows trans women are vulnerable to violence, and they are not unique in this regard.

                    • Molly …
                      23 November 2022 at 9:53 pm

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      (Don't get an orange rectangle – just white space)

                      Ok. I saw within the article I provided a full quote, so agree that arkie's original comment was incomplete and/or paraphrased. This has been acknowledged more than once.

                      Tragically, since we started this conversation another multiple shooting has been reported. The gun violence remains a scourge of the US.

                      The points you keep missing are:

                      1. Any reference to "and transgender women" implies targets were selected due to gender identity – the motive was (and remains, at present) unknown;
                      2. Thus any such reference is both assumptive and premature.
                      3. There automatically was the oft repeated vulnerability of transwomen that is not supported by evidence,

                      4, Despite looking, you couldn't find any additions to the link I provided which makes transwomen a particularly safe demographic. Much safer than children. (You no doubt came across some NZ incidents? Do you want to post?)

                      "Re your narrative, the mass murder at Club Q shows trans women are vulnerable to violence, and they are not unique in this regard."

                      Everyone is vulnerable to a bullet from a gun, or senseless violence, so why are transwomen continually referred to as especially vulnerable – without evidence of veracity? This sentence doesn't really make sense.

                      You refuse to recognise this storytelling has and continues to have an impact on discussions around women's right's and single sex spaces.

                      I've tried enough now to get you to understand the wider ramifications of a Pavlov type response.

                      I'm finished. Carry on if you need to.

                      (Oh, and feel free to post the one NZ transwoman murder while you're at it. I'm sure it would've come up in your searches.)

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      24 November 2022 at 9:38 am

                      You have continued to support the narrative that Biden promulgated that transgender women are vulnerable to violence.

                      @Molly – I don't believe that Biden's stance, as reported @9.2, is evidence that Biden promugated the narrative that transgender women are vulnerable to violence – that’s not how I read it.

                      Most people, including transgender people, have probably been vulnerable to violence at some time in the their life.

                      After reading the full text of Biden's (empathetic and statesman-like, imho) statement on 20 November 2022, I now agree with you that it indicates he believes transgender women are vulnerable to violence. Biden’s focus on the LGBTQI+ community is entirely appropriate in context – as for why he devoted a whole sentence to transgender women, “the epidemic of violence and murder” is a clue.

                      Of course, there’s no pleasing some people. Transgender women and dying – damned if you do and damned if you don’t sad

                      While no motive in this attack is yet clear, we know that the LGBTQI+ community has been subjected to horrific hate violence in recent years. Gun violence continues to have a devastating and particular impact on LGBTQI+ communities across our nation and threats of violence are increasing. We saw it six years ago in Orlando, when our nation suffered the deadliest attack affecting the LGBTQI+ community in American history. We continue to see it in the epidemic of violence and murder against transgender women – especially transgender women of color. And tragically, we saw it last night in this devastating attack by a gunman wielding a long rifle at an LGBTQI+ nightclub in Colorado Springs.

                      Places that are supposed to be safe spaces of acceptance and celebration should never be turned into places of terror and violence. Yet it happens far too often. We must drive out the inequities that contribute to violence against LGBTQI+ people. We cannot and must not tolerate hate.

                      Today, yet another community in America has been torn apart by gun violence. More families left with an empty chair at the table and hole in their lives that cannot be filled. When will we decide we've had enough? We must address the public health epidemic of gun violence in all of its forms. Earlier this year, I signed the most significant gun safety law in nearly three decades, in addition to taking other historic actions. But we must do more. We need to enact an assault weapons ban to get weapons of war off America's streets.

                      Today, Jill and I are praying for the families of the five people killed in Colorado Springs last night, and for those injured in this senseless attack.

                      https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/president-joe-biden-issues-statement-deadly-mass-shooting-colorado-springs-lgbtq-club/

                      Transgender people over four times more likely than cisgender people to be victims of violent crime [23 March 2021]

                      Number of trans homicides doubled over 4 years, with gun killings fueling increase: Advocates [13 Oct. 2022]
                      An Everytown report examines how pervasive gun violence is against LGBTQ people.

                      Why Sexual Assault is So Prevalent in Transgender and Non-Binary Communities [11 April 2022]
                      According to the National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC), one in two transgender women will experience sexual violence in their lifetime. This statistic is alarming and underscores the need for greater awareness and support for transgender and non-binary people who have experienced sexual violence.

                      You refuse to recognise this storytelling has and continues to have an impact on discussions around women's right's and single sex spaces.

                      First I've heard of this particular refusal of mine – talk about “a Pavlov type response.” Personally I would have avoided using “storytelling” as a pejorative so soon after the Club Q attack. Btw, I support women's rights and single sex spaces – don't know about Jill and Joe Biden.

                    • Molly …
                      24 November 2022 at 12:40 pm

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      Thank you for posting three links to statistics regarding the violence experienced by transgender people.

                      Two actually come from the same source, and do note the high incidence of harm to transgender women. The further analysis that they link to – which applies to your third link about gun violence – shows that they are highly represented in other groups that make them (along with others in the group) exposed to situations where violence can occur.

                      https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publications/2019-02/Transgender_infographic_508_0.pdf

                      eg. 72% were involved in sex work,

                      65% had been homeless, 61% had disabilities etc.

                      It is not one factor in isolation here.

                      You cannot assume that transgender women are vulnerable because of their gender identity when so many other significant factors are in play. That is not to say that it is NOT a factor, just that the impact of it has to be determined to state with confidence that it was the primary factor.

                      A quick search on Google Scholar pulled up this study based on prostitutes translates quite closely to the figures of harm you posted, when you account for the 72% of transgender women involved in prostitution:

                      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9698636/

                      If we are talking about job harm, then prostitution has to be one of the most vulnerable. Is it any wonder that those within it have higher rates of assault and violence?

                      "Personally I would have avoided using “storytelling” as a pejorative so soon after the Club Q attack.

                      Yeah, I know. My word choice is not to your taste. I'll live with the criticism. Your critique of the use of "narcissistic rage" when discussing the following makes your vocabulary advice less than persuasive:

                      "The discussion turns to the “blunt force wounds” (bruising, basically) found on Reed. Dr. Rogers found bruises on the top part of a finger, thighs, knees, other parts of legs, and the front part of the abdomen. (It should be noted that Dr. Rogers uses his report to assist him for much of his testimony.) The Prosecution asks if Reed’s bruises could be due to an assailant pinning her down. He says that “it’s a possibility,” but cannot give any further confirmation.

                      Dr. Rogers proceeds to talk about the gunshot wounds found on Reed. There were two gunshot wounds, one on the front left side of the chest, the other on the front side of the left shoulder. The bullet that caused the former wound passed through the ribs and left lung. Since there was no exit wound, the bullet remained in the lung. This wound also contained “stippling,” or gunpowder residue; stippling is only present when the gun is very close to the target when fired. There was hemorrhaging associated with this wound, meaning that Reed was still alive at the time she received this wound. The second bullet wound, the one to the shoulder, also had hemorrhaging and signs of stippling. This one penetrated soft tissue.

                      He also details multiple stab wounds (“deep” cuts) and incise wounds (“shallow” cuts), he reckons over 40 total: 28 on head/neck area, 12 on torso, one on right arm, and some on both hands. He goes through them, one by one. Of note is that some of the stab/incise wounds had hemorrhaging, while others did not. This means the assailant stabbed Reed while she was still alive and continued to stab her after she died. He adds that some of the wounds were consistent with a double-edged blade, some with a single-edged blade, and others were indeterminable.

                      Dr. Rogers then discusses 2 gunshot wounds found on Dimabu. One appears to be a grazing wound, that is, a wound where the bullet just brushes against the skin rather than piercing the skin. He admits that he isn’t certain this is a grazing wound, but it’s his best guess, based on his experience. The second bullet pierced his heart. Photos are shown of Diambu’s injuries. Dr. Rogers concludes the bullet to the heart was the cause of Diambu’s death…

                      ..The summary of Wright’s injuries is as follows:

                      • “Blunt injuries” consist of one scrape to the left side of Wright’s neck.
                      • There are 4 gunshot wounds on Wright, in 2 pairs — that is, there are two wounds where bullets entered, and two where they exited. Both hit critical organs. One bullet entered through the left breast, the second on the left back. This latter is “possibly” indicative of Wright being shot in the back as she was lying on her stomach.
                      • There is a stab wound on the left side of Wright’s neck.

                      …

                      Dr. Rogers agrees with Dr. Herman’s conclusion that Wright died due to multiple bullet and stab wounds…."

                      It is taken you over ten attempts to provide statistics to back up your assertion that transwomen are a particularly vulnerable group. And those statistics are not evidence of that fact, because of the other factors.

                      So, when I say you have a Pavlov response, it is because you only sought out the evidence after many requests, and still maintain this is the right sequence. (We'll ignore the fact that the quality provided is still low).

                      "Btw, I support women's rights and single sex spaces"

                      These days, due to language appropriation and legislative, policy and guideline changes, that sentence means very little in isolation.

                    • Molly …
                      24 November 2022 at 2:05 pm

                      For any diehards or insomniacs still following this conversation, an article with some good links and a good summation paragraph:

                      https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-how-many-trans-people-murdered-uk

                      Until we have those official statistics, we should handle the data we do have with care. Anyone that tells you this is clear-cut – on either side of this often vexed debate – is wrong.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      24 November 2022 at 3:04 pm

                      "Btw, I support women's rights and single sex spaces"

                      These days, due to language appropriation and legislative, policy and guideline changes, that sentence means very little in isolation.

                      @Molly, how about this more long-winded sentence?

                      I support women's and transgender women's rights, and spaces exclusively for the use of each of the following: women, transgender men, transgender women, and men.

                      Open to brief alternatives that aren't hostile to the above groups.

                    • Molly …
                      24 November 2022 at 3:45 pm

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      "I support women's and transgender women's rights, and spaces exclusively for the use of each of the following: women, transgender men, transgender women, and men."

                      Right, it appears that after skipping over relevant points we've now made the leap to a different topic. Can do, but with this proviso – you shouldn't really care about whether I think you support women's rights or not.

                      You – and I – should just be working towards clearly explaining our own views, and attempting to understand the other's position. We don't need labels to do this.

                      With that in mind, a couple of follow up questions:

                      1. What is your idea of space?

                      Single-sex facilities, services, support services, sports, women's organisations, prison estate, awards, scholarships, language specific to each group?

                      1. It looks like you are advocating for third and fourth spaces.

                      Interestingly, most women's right advocates have no problem accommodating trans identified women of any type in their single-sex spaces.

                      (Men – on the other hand – unanimously want trans identified men out of their spaces, and into women's.)

                      Women who have suggested third spaces to accommodate these men have been called transphobic, bigoted, and TERVEN – so welcome to the club.

                      1. How is the provision of third and fourth spaces practically and financially viable across the board, so as to be a reasonable solution?
                      2. Would there not be a further difficulty in having to create yet more spaces for the additional gender identities, including the non-binary, and the new WPATH category of eunuch, and nullgenders?

                      Can you see how this solution has additional problems?

                      The difficulty with your stated position, is not that it wouldn’t be supported by women who want to retain single-se spaces, it is the option that is most often and consistently refused by transgender people.

                      Many (or the loudest) don’t want a third option, (or I’m guessing, a fourth) unless it is the only option (ie. unisex provision only). Many (OTL) want only admittance into the single-sex space to which they do not belong (for a myriad of reasons).

                      Now, a solution that does not guarantee safety (- but that guarantee is impossible to give) – is that men, collectively ensure that trans identified men are safe in their single-sex spaces.

                      No boundary breaking required.

                      (Numbering of questions autocorrected to irrelevance. Leaving it, as not important).

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      24 November 2022 at 10:54 pm

                      Right, it appears that after skipping over relevant points we've now made the leap to a different topic.

                      @Molly – please be gentle. You were the first to mention women's rights and single sex spaces in this thread.

                      You refuse to recognise this storytelling has and continues to have an impact on discussions around women's right's and single sex spaces.

                      1. What is your idea of space?

                      Was thinking public loos, changing rooms/showers – maybe also in private businesses such as gyms. There are (were?) some women-only gyms in Palmy. Yes, prison cells too – hadn't thought of them.

                      2. It looks like you are advocating for third and fourth spaces.

                      Yes – can't please everyone, but (cost aside) this might displease the least, although it would make transgender people more visible, which is probably not what many of them want – tricky.

                      It's good that most women's rights advocates have no problem accommodating transgender men of any type in their single-sex spaces, but (to my mind) this is more about whether even a small number of woman using a single-sex space might have a problem. If it turned out that none did, then that would simplify things – only third spaces (for transgender women) would be needed.

                      Men – on the other hand – unanimously want trans identified men out of their spaces, and into women's.

                      Gosh – all men? That's depressing. Not me though – third spaces for transgender women would be fine as far as I'm concerned.

                      3. How is the provision of third and fourth spaces practically and financially viable across the board, so as to be a reasonable solution?

                      Don't know how easy/financially feasible the provision of third spaces would be – imho some accommodation is required. What might the alternative(s) be – to 'unmake' transgender women, or otherwise fix them (and men) so that only one space is required? Is this a realistic option, given men’s propensity for violence, and the idea that men unanimously want transgender women out of their spaces?

                      Now, a solution that does not guarantee safety (- but that guarantee is impossible to give) – is that men, collectively ensure that trans identified men are safe in their single-sex spaces.

                      Since you raised the issue of practicality in 3, might I suggest that the idea of all men in their single sex spaces being non-violent towards transgender women seems more like a lovely dream than an alternative solution – implementation without the necessary behaviour modification could increase the incidence of assaults on transgender women. Safer to put men and transgender women in separate cages, imho.

                      Otoh, if you have a practical plan to modify behaviour en masse, how about rolling it out first in Russia/Ukraine before moving on to war zones closer to home.

                    • Molly …
                      25 November 2022 at 8:09 am

                      @Drowsy M Kram

                      I know you are unlikely to believe it, but I am being gentle, as best I can. If you look back, I try not to ascribe motives or intentions, but make the assumption that perhaps the other person in the conversation has not considered, or does not know, and work towards that. It can come across as abrupt, where clarity is intended. I think there also may be an expectation of a different style of engagement because of my female name. This approach seems to be more common and accepted in males.

                      That said. I do genuinely appreciate you continuing this exchange.

                      The single-sex spaces was introduced, because the conversation is affected by an assumption that transwomen are vulnerable and need to be accommodated in women's single-sex spaces for that reason.

                      You are correct about the unanimous – it was a left over adjective from an edit – and by the time I noticed it, the edit had gone. I know there are men who would support trans identified men in their spaces. I'd even go further and say there are those that would ensure their safety and comfort while in them.

                      It's interesting that you had only considered single-sex spaces to refer to facilities for changing and toileting. Transwomen have demanded and been admitted to breastfeeding forums, pregnancy support groups, women's organisations, women's clubs – the list goes on. The impacts range from mild to significant, but there is always an impact.

                      There is so much in regards to facilities that should be considered and when I was trying to organise my own thoughts, I wrote a series of threads on Twitter (… I know..). I'll link them to text here so they don't take up so much space. I'd probably be able to write them more clearly now, but they are a good record of what and how I think.

                      They began mostly in response to the constant accusation that keeping single-sex spaces was akin to claiming all transwomen are predatory:

                      Safeguarding and risk assessment

                      The vulnerability of trans identified males

                      Understanding women's differences

                      The second was when I undertook the online research for statistics that I asked you to do. I will endeavour to read all links provided to me in conversations, after someone has taken the time to do so, but I also think that self-discovery of information is much more persuasive then me providing links for which the source or the author is then condemned without discussion of content.

                      On the topic of women's rights and gender ideology, there are very few "left-wing" publications that accurately report concerns, and give space to women's rights advocates – unless they include men.

                      In regards to additional spaces, it is the safest environments that are most likely to be able to afford accommodation in third spaces. When government and councils are strapped for resources, this provision (that is fundamentally unnecessary – especially if all they do is "want to pee") is a waste of resources.

                      And yes, I did do a thread on toilet design too. smiley

                      "It's good that most women's rights advocates have no problem accommodating transgender men of any type in their single-sex spaces, but (to my mind) this is more about whether even a small number of woman using a single-sex space might have a problem. If it turned out that none did, then that would simplify things – only third spaces (for transgender women) would be needed."

                      That's an interesting perspective. Given that many women have indicated a problem with trans-identified men using their spaces, and they have been ignored and accused of transphobia, bigotry and hatred, your concession to women who might be concerned about other women (with a gender identity) using single-sex spaces is one that hasn't been offered many times before.

                      Moving on to prisons, which you had not given much thought to. In NZ's prison estate, there are no official published statistics, and though people have tried to do OIR, there has been some difficulty in ascertaining how accurate they are.

                      Submissions for the amendments for the BDMRR bill asked for clarity on the how single-sex spaces would be ensured, and were told that there was no impact. This was said, knowing that single-sex spaces had already been breached, and the concerns around spaces such as prisons, had already been realised:

                      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/112432880/transgender-prisoner-investigated-for-sexual-assault-behind-bars

                      While the discussion was taking place the NZ media published opinion pieces and narratives around the vulnerability of transwomen, and this does do much to derail the concerns of women when they are raised.

                      "Since you raised the issue of practicality in 3, might I suggest that the idea of all men in their single sex spaces being non-violent towards transgender women seems more like a lovely dream than an alternative solution – implementation without the necessary behaviour modification could increase the incidence of assaults on transgender women. Safer to put men and transgender women in separate cages, imho."

                      Cages? I suspect you are talking specifically about prisons here, rather than toilet facilities, or other single-sex spaces. Like any instance where people are confined involuntarily, it requires a different consideration, I agree.

                      I have several times on this platform posted a link to a facility that has been in place in the LA County Jail system, that not only caters to transgender identified men, but homosexual men that are at elevated risk. There are other vulnerable males in the prison system that could also benefit from separation, but this example is one that shows a working solution:

                      https://youtu.be/2thDt4twxww

                      Any government that imprisons their citizens, should also ensure their safety while imprisoned, and such allocation of resources seems necessary to me. So neither impractical or financially wasteful in this particular instance.

                      Otoh, if you have a practical plan to modify behaviour en masse, how about rolling it out first in Russia/Ukraine before moving on to war zones closer to home.

                      I don't really understand what you are saying here. Unless, you thought that when I wrote of practical considerations and financial costs – it applied to all single sex spaces.

                      What is important, is that solutions are found that do not assume that because women's single-sex spaces are a safeguarding and privacy measure that works for women, that women's spaces are therefore the safest place to put men.

      • Molly 9.2.2
        22 November 2022 at 12:26 pm

        There's an article in the NYT with a first hand account from someone at Club Q;

        https://archive.ph/L1sA1

        • Sabine 9.2.2.1
          24 November 2022 at 11:12 am

          The person who committed the crime identified as 'Non binary' with 'they/them' pronouns.

          Question: did they do that to wriggle out of a hate crime? And if so can we assume that men would and will appropriate a trans identity in order to receive a better and lesser punishment, or instead of being locked up in a male prison will get transferred to a female prison, or to just get out of a hate crime that they committed. And Just a few hours later 10 people were being gunned down by another disgruntled person in a shop.

          Sadness everywhere.

  10. Stephen D 10
    21 November 2022 at 8:46 pm

    Why doesn’t Winston just rejoin National, and be done with it?