hypochondriac

Cheers never seen that before. Bizarre. I suppose we do want to keep this thread free for serious lgbtq+ discussion

Didn't you get beaten up by your wife?

Hold on @Lord Duckhunteryour post seems to have disappeared as does the one from @Turkishand myself. Either a mod got drunk with power and removed them of their own accord or soggy went crying to the mods demanding their removal. Either is pathetic.

I think there's a fair bit of evidence to support that analysis. He's previously mentioned he was psychologically abused by his wife. Something like that over a sustained period is bound to have an adverse effect on a man and lead to him acting out little fantasies in the virtual world to compensate for his feelings of inadequacy.

Homosexuality doesn't involve chopping off your genetalia, sterilisation, atrophy, menopause at a young age, increased cancer risk, lifelong medical treatment etc etc.

" I think they know what is going on with themselves better than you" So do we apply that to anorexics? Or individuals with phantom limb syndrome? "I'd like to prevent you front starvation or from chopping off your hand but I suppose you know what is going on with yourself better than me so I'll just help you starve and get the cleaver out"

Very bizarre comment to make.

Much too early to tell.

I'll make a charitable donation if soggy can answer what a woman is properly.

You can't convince me we had the level of fitness last year that we had under Poch.

Who is tdmickey3? I'm assuming he's an old poster with a new name.

Totally agree. After what we had under Poch, it was embarrassing seeing our team being less fit than the opposition.

He might be but I'm not sure I'd want to risk starting the season hoping that that's the case. Our whole season could hinge on this decision.

From memory I managed around 16. Jwp is mentally fit.

Seems a bit of a weird one though if his passing isn't great. You'd think that would be a basic requirement of a signing for Martins team.

Yes I agree. I wouldn't get rid of him but I think it's vital that we get in some proper quality so that he can be safely dropped if required.

OK seems I may have been wrong and many think he needs replacing. How confident are people that he will actually be replaced? I'm not sure sports Republic are ready to admit failure and will persist under the rationale that he's had a year of experience.

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like the general consensus on here at the moment is that Bazunu is decent enough at the back to be first choice next season. I would personally be very unsure about that, given that he was one of our major weaknesses last year. Keepers of relegated teams will typically look quite good given how much they are required to do in a season (I remember David Marshall a few years back looking handy for example) yet Bazunu looked not up to standard for almost the entire season. Is it really wise to risk having him as our keeper for the whole season? Personally I'd be looking to bring in another strong keeper and have some actual competition there rather than just letting him be first choice because we don't really have anyone else. What do you think?

It is in some countries. Also puberty blockers are not fully reversable and they have been given to children. It's one of the reasons the Tavistock has been shut down.

The only difference between what soggy describes as sex reassignment surgery and fgm is the motivation of the perpetrator and the fact that the victim does not consent in the case of fgm.

Ignoring the issues with yougov polls and the bias involved in the type of people who complete them, in what world are those percentages not a lot of women?

Maybe I can put up a photo of his legs and you can all judge how much they look like a footballers.

Why would I lie about my brother in law being at spurs and then make it less impressive by saying he only played in the youth team and ended up in the lower leagues? Seems like a bit of a pointless lie

Women have a right to their own spaces. This should not be violated just because it may make a trans person feel more comfortable or safe. I could make the same argument and say that it makes me feel safer and more comfortable using the ladies changing room and by your logic my right to feel comfortable and safe would trump women's rights to their own spaces. You've admitted it's an issue and whilst not that important to you, it's clearly a really important one to a lot of women. I'd rather listen to them rather than thinking I know better than they do. The issue isn't necessarily the tiny handful of genuine trans people, it's that by blurring the lines and allowing it, you then have men who dress as women as a sexual fetish being allowed to get their kicks by self identifying as women and literally waving their cocks around. Pretending it doesn't happen is a denial of reality. We can't possibly know which men are the ones genuinely suffering from gender disphoria and which are autogynephiles so the safest and easiest thing to do is to remove the risk by preventing them from entering a female space. Not all trans people are perverts and dirty freaks, but by relaxing the rules, you allow perverts and dirty freaks to call themselves trans and then gain a sporting advantage, gain access to women's spaces and potentially put women in danger.

I'd give a plumber's opinion on my pipework more credence than my mate.