The Doctor wrote:
> In article <t68arf$au2$1@dont-email.me>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >> Tim is dense.
> >
> > He might have a slightly different grasp of reality to a lot of us,
> > but he's saner than YOU!
>
> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go?
> I do not think so.

But you are two sides of the same coin, as you reply to EVERY one of
Tim's posts! So if one is spamtrolling then the other is
spamreplying... YOU ARE BOTH THE SAME!!!

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <t68hga$vu$1@dont-email.me>,
> The Dark Doctor <darkdoctor@geocities.com> wrote:
> >
> > You must not have much experience with women if you are unaware
> > that there are biological women who have very small and even flat
> > breasts. The character is only supposed to be about 15 and
> > probably won't be wearing any revealing costumes. Based on video
> > clips I've seen this actor appears to be passable (or 'transfemme',
> > as they called it in the casting call). Most people would not have
> > guessed right away she was male
> >
>
> Shemale you mean.

I see you know the terminology, is that your search criteria on
X-Hamster?!!

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <t68vs9$hkm$1@dont-email.me>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >> In article <t68arf$au2$1@dont-email.me>,
> >> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> >> > The Doctor wrote:
> >> >> Tim is dense.
> >> >
> >> > He might have a slightly different grasp of reality to a lot of
> >> > us, but he's saner than YOU!
> >>
> >> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go?
> >> I do not think so.
> >
> > But you are two sides of the same coin, as you reply to EVERY one of
> > Tim's posts! So if one is spamtrolling then the other is
> > spamreplying... YOU ARE BOTH THE SAME!!!
>
> Am I?

Yes David, one hundred replies to one hundred spam posts by Tim = more
spam!

Reply to what you need to, ignore what you don't. It's not rocket
science.

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <t690bj$l55$1@dont-email.me>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >>
> >> Shemale you mean.
> >
> > I see you know the terminology, is that your search criteria on
> > X-Hamster?!!
>
> What is X-Hamster?

Nice try Dave! None of us are falling for that...

tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 7:43:59 AM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Your very last post here would be appreciated.
>
> I shall remember to post it, just before they nail shut the coffin!:)

Wait a bit longer and you can let us know if there's an afterlife...

If we don't hear from you we'll assume there isn't!

"solar penguin" wrote in message
news:9ac36a7b-f17e-41c7-a4be-9000fdc2ca3dn@googlegroups.com...

> If trans characters are played by cis actors, some viewers may
> get the the wrong impression that trans people aren't really
> trans but only pretending and acting and playing at being trans.
> (Just a man dressed up as a woman, or vice versa.)

I read an article recently where Yasmin talked about an incident where a
woman asked if she was a boy or a girl. She called the woman transphobic
for doing that. I am wondering if the same logic applies here, where some
viewers may get the wrong impression that trans people are easily outraged
and start name-calling in response to earnest questions, if that's who they
see portraying trans characters?

> OTOH this doesn't mean that trans actors should only ever play
> trans roles. Even though Yasmin Finney is trans, it shouldn't
> automatically mean that Rose Temple-Noble is.

Agreed, especially if they are passable.

The Doctor wrote:
> In article <fd1be0bb-3118-4a4e-a872-0e1ec2877c3an@googlegroups.com>,
> tsbr...@gmail.com <tsbrueni@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 9:08:57 PM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> >> You forget Donna's last appearance in the Tennant Era.
> >
> > I do remember her marrying someone, but not his name. I do not
> > remember dying in that episode.
>
> All right, she married someone Indian or black.

No, she married a man called Shaun Temple... his name wasn't Chief Red
Bull was it, so he wasn't an Injun!

He might consider himself Black British though... but as he is a
fictional character we might never find out.

The Doctor wrote on 21/5/22 6:23 am:
> In article <t68arf$au2$1@dont-email.me>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote:
>>> In article <d3047a33-ba52-4967-8ad9-ea533b023eebn@googlegroups.com>,
>>> tsbr...@gmail.com <tsbrueni@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 2:22:00 AM UTC-7, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>>> tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 2:17:07 PM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Wait and see.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why was The Last Doctor so definite sounding about Rose being
>>>>>> trans? He typed as if Rose being trans was set in stone.
>>>>> She almost certainly is. RTD is known to be very strong on trans
>>>>> rights, so if he employs a trans actress then it's highly likely
>>>>> she is playing a trans character.
>>>>
>>>> Why would he limit trans actors to playing trans characters?
>>>
>>> Tim is dense.
>>
>> He might have a slightly different grasp of reality to a lot of us, but
>> he's saner than YOU!
>
> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go?
> I do not think so.

"Sapmtrolling" (whatever that is!!) may be a sane way to go, clown, but,
if it is, YOU'd know bugger all about it, clown!!

Oh! And by the way, clown .... (AKJV) Luke 6:42 Either how canst thou
say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine
eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then
shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
--
Daniel

The Doctor wrote on 22/5/22 8:35 am:
> In article <ad69176e-a9e3-4f1a-87e0-f1071bea8663n@googlegroups.com>,
> tsbr...@gmail.com <tsbrueni@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 6:28:28 AM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> In article <83960d7f-58b7-4c0a...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> tsbr...@gmail.com <tsbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 2:22:00 AM UTC-7, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>>> tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 2:17:07 PM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Wait and see.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why was The Last Doctor so definite sounding about Rose being
>>>>>> trans? He typed as if Rose being trans was set in stone.
>>>>> She almost certainly is. RTD is known to be very strong on trans
>>>>> rights, so if he employs a trans actress then it's highly likely she
>>>>> is playing a trans character.
>>>>
>>>> A trans Companion would be appropriate for a character who can change
>>>> its gender!
>>>>
>>>> Will Doctor 14 be awed by meeting a mere human who has changed its gender?
>>> How dense are you Tim?
>>
>> Has the Doctor ever before met a transgender human?
>
> An Alpha Centauran, but still!

So *NOT* a human as Tim asked for, clown!!

So nothing worthwhile to contribute .... but *HAD* to contribute,
none-the-less!! But, still, it's a post so added to your Precious Post
Count, clown!!

Oh! And by the way, clown .... (AKJV) Luke 6:42 Either how canst thou
say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine
eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then
shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
--
Daniel

Blueshirt wrote on 21/5/22 8:46 pm:
> tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 7:43:59 AM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Your very last post here would be appreciated.
>>
>> I shall remember to post it, just before they nail shut the coffin!:)
>
> Wait a bit longer and you can let us know if there's an afterlife...
>
> If we don't hear from you we'll assume there isn't!
>
Or, maybe, the Afterlife just has real SHIT Internet connections .....
something the clown would know all about!!
--
Daniel

Blueshirt wrote on 22/5/22 2:04 am:
> The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <fd1be0bb-3118-4a4e-a872-0e1ec2877c3an@googlegroups.com>,
>> tsbr...@gmail.com <tsbrueni@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 9:08:57 PM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>> You forget Donna's last appearance in the Tennant Era.
>>>
>>> I do remember her marrying someone, but not his name. I do not
>>> remember dying in that episode.
>>
>> All right, she married someone Indian or black.
>
> No, she married a man called Shaun Temple... his name wasn't Chief Red
> Bull was it, so he wasn't an Injun!
>
> He might consider himself Black British though... but as he is a
> fictional character we might never find out.

In my 'Mind's Eye', I see him as a Caribbean Man, rather than any sort
of Indian!!
--
Daniel

Daniel65 wrote:

> Blueshirt wrote on 22/5/22 2:04 am:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <fd1be0bb-3118-4a4e-a872-0e1ec2877c3an@googlegroups.com>,
> >>tsbr...@gmail.com <tsbrueni@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 9:08:57 PM UTC-7,
> > > > netk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > You forget Donna's last appearance in the Tennant Era.
> > > >
> > > > I do remember her marrying someone, but not his name. I do
> > > > not remember dying in that episode.
> > >
> > > All right, she married someone Indian or black.
> >
> > No, she married a man called Shaun Temple... his name wasn't
> > Chief Red Bull was it, so he wasn't an Injun!
> >
> > He might consider himself Black British though... but as he is a
> > fictional character we might never find out.
>
> In my 'Mind's Eye', I see him as a Caribbean Man, rather than any
> sort of Indian!!

Well, he was dark skinned but obviously we didn't get much depth in
to the background of Shaun Temple. His role in the episode was he was
marrying Donna, he was an irrelevant character beyond that at the
time. We're only talking about him now because of Rose Noble-Temple,
who [we assume] is Shaun & Donna's daughter, and she also has dark
skin. We probably won't see Shaun Temple again or know whether Rose
considers herself of Black British or Indian descent.

The Doctor wrote on 22/5/22 9:30 pm:
> In article <t6csiv$uh0$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel65
> <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote on 21/5/22 6:23 am:
>>> In article <t68arf$au2$1@dont-email.me>, Blueshirt
>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>> The Doctor wrote:

<Snip>

>>>>>> Why would he limit trans actors to playing trans
>>>>>> characters?
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim is dense.
>>>>
>>>> He might have a slightly different grasp of reality to a lot of
>>>> us, but he's saner than YOU!
>>>
>>> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go? I do not think so.
>>
>> "Sapmtrolling" (whatever that is!!) may be a sane way to go, clown,
>> but, if it is, YOU'd know bugger all about it, clown!!

> Spamming is a bad partcie Dannyboy, let alone spamtrolling!

So nothing worthwhile to contribute .... but *HAD* to contribute,
none-the-less!! But, still, it's a post so added to your Precious Post
Count, clown!!

Oh! And by the way, clown .... (AKJV) Luke 6:42 Either how canst thou
say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine
eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then
shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
--
Daniel

The Doctor wrote on 22/5/22 9:30 pm:
> In article <t6ctep$3lr$1@dont-email.me>,
> Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote on 22/5/22 8:35 am:
>>> In article <ad69176e-a9e3-4f1a-87e0-f1071bea8663n@googlegroups.com>,
>>> tsbr...@gmail.com <tsbrueni@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 6:28:28 AM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> In article <83960d7f-58b7-4c0a...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> tsbr...@gmail.com <tsbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 2:22:00 AM UTC-7, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>>>>> tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 2:17:07 PM UTC-7, netk...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Wait and see.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why was The Last Doctor so definite sounding about Rose being
>>>>>>>> trans? He typed as if Rose being trans was set in stone.
>>>>>>> She almost certainly is. RTD is known to be very strong on trans
>>>>>>> rights, so if he employs a trans actress then it's highly likely she
>>>>>>> is playing a trans character.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A trans Companion would be appropriate for a character who can change
>>>>>> its gender!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Will Doctor 14 be awed by meeting a mere human who has changed its gender?
>>>>> How dense are you Tim?
>>>>
>>>> Has the Doctor ever before met a transgender human?
>>>
>>> An Alpha Centauran, but still!
>>
>> So *NOT* a human as Tim asked for, clown!!
>>
>> So nothing worthwhile to contribute .... but *HAD* to contribute,
>> none-the-less!! But, still, it's a post so added to your Precious Post
>> Count, clown!!

> What do you recall, Dannyboy?

I recall that YOU, clown, answered a question that wasn't asked, clown!!

Oh! And by the way, clown .... (AKJV) Luke 6:42 Either how canst thou
say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine
eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then
shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
--
Daniel

Binky bleated:

> In article <t6csiv$uh0$1@dont-email.me>,
> Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote on 21/5/22 6:23 am:
>>>
>>>
>>> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go?
>>> I do not think so.
>>
>> "Sapmtrolling" (whatever that is!!) may be a sane way to go,
>> clown, but, if it is, YOU'd know bugger all about it, clown!!
>>
>
> Spamming is a bad partcie Dannyboy, let alone spamtrolling!
>

A bad partcie Dannyboy? As opposed to all those other
partcie Dannyboys?

--
solar penguin

The Doctor wrote on 24/5/22 12:14 am:
> In article <t6fibs$pba$2@dont-email.me>,
> Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote on 22/5/22 9:30 pm:
>>> In article <t6csiv$uh0$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel65
>>> <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>>> The Doctor wrote on 21/5/22 6:23 am:
>>>>> In article <t68arf$au2$1@dont-email.me>, Blueshirt
>>>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>
>> <Snip>
>>
>>>>>>>> Why would he limit trans actors to playing trans
>>>>>>>> characters?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim is dense.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He might have a slightly different grasp of reality to a lot of
>>>>>> us, but he's saner than YOU!
>>>>>
>>>>> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go? I do not think so.
>>>>
>>>> "Sapmtrolling" (whatever that is!!) may be a sane way to go, clown,
>>>> but, if it is, YOU'd know bugger all about it, clown!!
>>
>>> Spamming is a bad practice Dannyboy, let alone spamtrolling!
>>
>> So nothing worthwhile to contribute .... but *HAD* to contribute,
>> none-the-less!! But, still, it's a post so added to your Precious Post
>> Count, clown!!

> How clueless are you, Dannyboy?

Not as clueless as YOU, clown!!

Oh! And by the way, clown .... (AKJV) Luke 6:42 Either how canst thou
say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine
eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then
shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
--
Daniel

Binky bleated:

> In article <t6fnr7$3rb$1@dont-email.me>,
> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Binky bleated:
>>
>>> In article <t6csiv$uh0$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>>> The Doctor wrote on 21/5/22 6:23 am:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go?
>>>>> I do not think so.
>>>>
>>>> "Sapmtrolling" (whatever that is!!) may be a sane way to go,
>>>> clown, but, if it is, YOU'd know bugger all about it, clown!!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Spamming is a bad practice Dannyboy, let alone spamtrolling!
>>>

Is lying a bad practice? That isn’t what you posted.

>>
>> A bad practice Dannyboy? As opposed to all those other
>> practice Dannyboys?
>>

And that isn’t what I replied.

>
> Well memorry issues for Daniel65 could cause this.
>

I’m sure he remembers that you’re a liar. You remind everyone
of it with every lie you tell.

--
solar penguin

Binky bleated:

> In article <t6j927$gnq$1@dont-email.me>,
> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Binky bleated:
>>
>>> In article <t6fnr7$3rb$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <t6csiv$uh0$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>>>>> The Doctor wrote on 21/5/22 6:23 am:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go?
>>>>>>> I do not think so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Sapmtrolling" (whatever that is!!) may be a sane way to go,
>>>>>> clown, but, if it is, YOU'd know bugger all about it, clown!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Spamming is a bad practice Dannyboy, let alone spamtrolling!
>>>>>
>>
>> Is lying a bad practice? That isn’t what you posted.
>>
>>>>
>>>> A bad practice Dannyboy? As opposed to all those other
>>>> practice Dannyboys?
>>>>
>>
>> And that isn’t what I replied.
>>
>>>
>>> Well memorry issues for Daniel65 could cause this.
>>>
>>
>> I’m sure he remembers that you’re a liar. You remind everyone
>> of it with every lie you tell.
>>
>
> Lies SP!
>

Me? How? Point to one single lie I made in that post.

--
solar penguin

Binky bleated:

> In article <t6jjuq$14f$1@dont-email.me>,
> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Binky bleated:
>>
>>> In article <t6j927$gnq$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <t6fnr7$3rb$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article <t6csiv$uh0$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>> Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> The Doctor wrote on 21/5/22 6:23 am:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go?
>>>>>>>>> I do not think so.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Sapmtrolling" (whatever that is!!) may be a
>>>>>>>> sane way to go, clown, but, if it is, YOU'd know
>>>>>>>> bugger all about it, clown!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Spamming is a bad practice Dannyboy, let alone
>>>>>>>> spamtrolling!
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is lying a bad practice? That isn’t what you posted.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A bad practice Dannyboy? As opposed to all those
>>>>>> other practice Dannyboys?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And that isn’t what I replied.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well memorry issues for Daniel65 could cause
>>>> this.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I’m sure he remembers that you’re a liar. You remind
>>>> everyone of it with every lie you tell.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Lies SP!
>>>
>>
>> Me? How? Point to one single lie I made in that post.
>>
>
> About you defending spamtrolling.
>

Liar! I never even mentioned defending spamtrolling.

--
solar penguin

Binky bleated:

> In article <t6kk32$o9h$1@dont-email.me>,
> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Binky bleated:
>>
>>> In article <t6jjuq$14f$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <t6j927$gnq$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article <t6fnr7$3rb$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In article <t6csiv$uh0$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>> Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> The Doctor wrote on 21/5/22 6:23 am:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sapmtrolling is a sane way to go?
>>>>>>>>>>> I do not think so.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Sapmtrolling" (whatever that is!!) may be a
>>>>>>>>>> sane way to go, clown, but, if it is, YOU'd know
>>>>>>>>>> bugger all about it, clown!!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Spamming is a bad practice Dannyboy, let alone
>>>>>>>>>> spamtrolling!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is lying a bad practice? That isn’t what you posted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A bad practice Dannyboy? As opposed to all those
>>>>>>>> other practice Dannyboys?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And that isn’t what I replied.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well memorry issues for Daniel65 could cause
>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m sure he remembers that you’re a liar. You remind
>>>>>> everyone of it with every lie you tell.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Lies SP!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Me? How? Point to one single lie I made in that post.
>>>>
>>>
>>> About you defending spamtrolling.
>>>
>>
>> Liar! I never even mentioned defending spamtrolling.
>>
>
> Look above again Birdie!
>

I have looked above. I didn’t see any mention of anything
about defending your spamtrolling.

That’s just another of your lies.

--
solar penguin

tsbru...@gmail.com wrote:

> 225 15 15 On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 5:52:49 PM UTC-7, The True
> Agamemnon wrote:
> > The rabid wokery destroying Doctor Who continues.
> >
> > https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/doctor-who-casts-first-trans-269
> > 81287
> >
> > Rose Tyler has been replaced by RTD with an actor who was born a
> > man.
> >
> > This kind of deception is morally unjustifiable.
>
> Is there a trans disclosure rule?

Don't encourage the lunatics...

tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 5:36:28 AM UTC-7, The Other Doctor wrote:
> >
> > Deception? You don't need to know ANYTHING about Yasmin Finney,
> > apart from the fact she's the actress who will be playing Rose. It
> > doesn't matter whether she's trans. It doesn't matter what her sex
> > or sexuality is. The only thing that matters is whether she suits
> > the part she's been cast in.
>
> I think that Aggy thinks that a transgender woman would not suit the
> part of Rose Temple-Noble!

I think Agamemnon would rather live in the 1950's.

tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Aggy clearly thinks that the trans nature of the new Rose actress
> should have been disclosed up front by the BBC and RTD. This caused
> me to wonder if there is a rule requiring such disclosure.

If we know that the actress Yasmin Finney is transgender, how have we
been deceived? It's not a secret! So where is the deception?

tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 5:52:49 PM UTC-7, The True Doctor wrote:
> > The rabid wokery destroying Doctor Who continues.
> >
> > https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/doctor-who-casts-first-trans-269
> > 81287
> >
> > Rose Tyler has been replaced by RTD with an actor who was born a
> > man.
> >
> > This kind of deception is morally unjustifiable.
>
> If you had been told up front by RTD and the BBC that Yasmin Finney
> is a trans woman, what would you have done?

Agamemnon would have complained anyway, with exactly the same bigoted
nonsense that he posted anyway.

Binky bleated:

> In article <t6lqrr$iq4$1@dont-email.me>,
> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Binky bleated:
>>
>>> In article <t6kk32$o9h$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <t6jjuq$14f$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article <t6j927$gnq$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In article <t6fnr7$3rb$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>> solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Binky bleated:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In article <t6csiv$uh0$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Spamming is a bad practice Dannyboy,
>>>>>>>>>>>> let alone spamtrolling!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is lying a bad practice? That isn’t what you posted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A bad practice Dannyboy? As opposed to
>>>>>>>>>> all those other practice Dannyboys?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And that isn’t what I replied.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well memorry issues for Daniel65 could cause
>>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I’m sure he remembers that you’re a liar. You
>>>>>>>> remind everyone of it with every lie you tell.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lies SP!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Me? How? Point to one single lie I made in that post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> About you defending spamtrolling.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Liar! I never even mentioned defending spamtrolling.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Look above again Birdie!
>>>
>>
>> I have looked above. I didn’t see any mention of anything
>> about defending your spamtrolling.
>>
>> That’s just another of your lies.
>>
>
> Tim is the expert spamtroller around here.
>
> Caught lying again, birdie!
>

What lies have I told? Quote them.

Oh, wait. You can’t because you’re the only one who’s
lying.

--
solar penguin