The Gender Debate

[carpetmonster]

4 minutes ago, Zern said:

It's really hard to maintain the facade of being the "good guys" when the "baddies" turn up and start saluting your speeches. 

She gave an interview to this bloke while she was in Oz too. Seems nice. Very feminist. 

https://www.thejc.com/news/world/avi-yemini-jewish-spokesperson-for-tommy-robinson-convicted-of-assault-against-former-wife-1.486946

[f_c_dundee]

33 minutes ago, Zern said:

Well, when someone claims that the additional meaning was added due to "the dictionaries caving" i can only deduce that they are unaware of how dictionaries operate. Are you able to provide any evidence for you claim? Or is this more conspiratorial muttering on you part?

Not really conspiratorial, but I'll accept it was a throwaway comment. You'd think that some fker responsible for dictionary maintenance would go "haud on a minute, words have meanings" though.

33 minutes ago, Zern said:

Yes, the term is imprecise. Circular even. That's because language is imprecise, general and not a philosophical treatise. Our ideas of what 'man' and 'woman' has changed as our culture has changed.

Nah. Words have meanings and circular definitions are no use.

33 minutes ago, Zern said:

Gender-bending is nothing new, we've always had stories where man passes as a woman and vice-versa. We've always used that to p***k the norms of society.

But the whole "no that actually is a woman (or man)" and I will call you a bigot if you won't accept it, has escalated slightly, no?

33 minutes ago, Zern said:

 

Shakespeare is an obvious touchstone, and one that becomes all the more interesting when you realise that women where not allowed to act in the theatre so ALL his women where in fact played by men.

Yes, due to the some of the many dumbass stereotypes and gender based restrictions applied to women throughout the years, in order to control them, generally. 

 

The historical women (e.g. Joan of Arc) being retrospectively painted as "maybe trans" are the dumbest of all. Women tried to pass as men because of the restrictions placed upon them, to train as doctors, to fight, to go out and get jobs, to vote etc. 

 

It's not the same thing.

 

 

[f_c_dundee]

8 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

She gave an interview to this bloke while she was in Oz too. Seems nice. Very feminist. 

https://www.thejc.com/news/world/avi-yemini-jewish-spokesperson-for-tommy-robinson-convicted-of-assault-against-former-wife-1.486946

The fact that all you will do about JKR or Posie Parker is talk about how they were seen near a bad guy, speaks volumes.

 

Where is your discussion about what's been said?

 

The libellous statement in the article is ok with you? 

 

"the claim he published in iNews that a Let Women Speak event in Australia 'staged a mass Nazi salute'. This is a lie so brazen, so easily disprovable and so libellous, I'm amazed it was allowed into print by a supposedly reputable news source."

 

 

[carpetmonster]

Just now, f_c_dundee said:

The fact that all you will do about JKR or Posie Parker is talk about how they were seen near a bad guy, speaks volumes.

 

Where is your discussion about what's been said?

 

The libellous statement in the article is ok with you? 

 

"the claim he published in iNews that a Let Women Speak event in Australia 'staged a mass Nazi salute'. This is a lie so brazen, so easily disprovable and so libellous, I'm amazed it was allowed into print by a supposedly reputable news source."

 

 

'Near a bad guy'? She gave an interview to Avi Yemini and she's given one previously to Jean-Francois Gariepy. Speaks volumes about who? 

https://www.thepinknews.com/2019/10/15/gender-critical-posie-parker-interview-jean-francois-gariepy-mumsnet/

 

He omitted 'attendees at' - attendees at the Let Women Speak event absolutely did. Victoria Premier Dan Andrews was so annoyed by it he's apparently going to put legislation in place to ban the gesture. If it's libelous, let her sue him. 

https://www.starobserver.com.au/news/dan-andrews-government-to-ban-nazi-salutes-in-victoria/222636

[Zern]

5 minutes ago, f_c_dundee said:

Not really conspiratorial, but I'll accept it was a throwaway comment. You'd think that some fker responsible for dictionary maintenance would go "haud on a minute, words have meanings" though.

Nah. Words have meanings and circular definitions are no use.

But the whole "no that actually is a woman (or man)" and I will call you a bigot if you won't accept it, has escalated slightly, no?

Yes, due to the some of the many dumbass stereotypes and gender based restrictions applied to women throughout the years, in order to control them, generally. 

 

The historical women (e.g. Joan of Arc) being retrospectively painted as "maybe trans" are the dumbest of all. Women tried to pass as men because of the restrictions placed upon them, to train as doctors, to fight, to go out and get jobs, to vote etc. 

 

It's not the same thing.

 

 

Gender-bending pokes at the pretension of fixed roles for genders, that's kind of the whole point, and our acceptance of it speaks to the long history of recognising how artificial the boundaries between men and woman are in practice. It's because we use signifiers and shorthand to make a decision on what we are being presented with.

It what allowed Bonnies Prince Charlies to pass in safety.

I expect whoever updated teh OED did inded say that word have meanings. Many meanings for some words. I think the word 'set' has probably one of the most expanded number of meanings in the dictionary, somewhere in the high 30's. A very versatile word that.

I notice you shed not one tear over your own additional meaning being added, no wringing of hands at the adulteration of that word. You have almost no real insight or criticism on traditional gender roles, instead being largely fixated on a perceived wrongness of trangender people in general.

Shouldn't you be called trangender critical instead of gender critical?

To avoid confusion and all.

[Zern]

34 minutes ago, f_c_dundee said:

The fact that all you will do about JKR or Posie Parker is talk about how they were seen near a bad guy, speaks volumes.

 

Where is your discussion about what's been said?

 

The libellous statement in the article is ok with you? 

 

"the claim he published in iNews that a Let Women Speak event in Australia 'staged a mass Nazi salute'. This is a lie so brazen, so easily disprovable and so libellous, I'm amazed it was allowed into print by a supposedly reputable news source."

 

 

 

Her speech has been criticised plenty.

What made this speech different was the enthusiastic cries of "Seig Heil" that followed her every pronouncement.

I think it is generally a sign that you are doing badly in life when you find yourself having Nazi cheerleaders.

You may disagree.

[Mr Waldo]

13 hours ago, Zern said:

For "the dictionary companies caved" read; they updated themselves, as they are wont to do. Regularly.

New words list March 2022 | Oxford English Dictionary (oed.com)

Its almost as if a dictionary is a descriptive list of words and meanings in common usage and the only thing forcing them to update is people using and accepting the terms.

Oh and from that link i can show you this:

gender critical adj.
(a) critical of traditional beliefs about gender, esp. based on the perspective of gender feminism (gender feminism n.);

(b) critical of the concept of gender identity, or the belief that gender identity outweighs or is more significant than biological sex.

That 2nd definition, only added in 2018.

 

It looks like some people made their mind up, the when things get pointed out, they bend and change the rules/evidence to suit.

In the meantime, here is a possible solution suggested at some demo yesterday. Is it possible that some people on both sides have extreme views?.

[Zern]

36 minutes ago, Mr Waldo said:

It looks like some people made their mind up, the when things get pointed out, they bend and change the rules/evidence to suit.

In the meantime, here is a possible solution suggested at some demo yesterday. Is it possible that some people on both sides have extreme views?.

Looks more tongue-in-cheek to me, i think the clue is the Howitzer within the Wendy house and it being a UK demo. I doubt there is any serious demand to make the MoD release its artillery for personal protection.

Is that the most extreme example you could find?

Because when it comes to extremists attending anti-trans events we have actual Nazis.

 

[f_c_dundee]

59 minutes ago, Zern said:

Looks more tongue-in-cheek to me, i think the clue is the Howitzer within the Wendy house and it being a UK demo. I doubt there is any serious demand to make the MoD release its artillery for personal protection.

Is that the most extreme example you could find?

Because when it comes to extremists attending anti-trans events we have actual Nazis.

 

Not seen many "GC" protesters ever turning up masked like they're scared to be identified though.

 

No one invited the Nazis. I don't think you even believe that - it's just a convenient diversion. Same as no one invites dubious Antifa types to come and get involved, but they have turned up on "the other side" anyway, especially in the US.

 

The whole point of the Let Women Speak events is that anyone can rock up, there's no control over that. It was also the police in Australia, if I recall correctly, that were seen allowing the Nazi salute dudes up onto the steps...

 

There's no way that "arm trans kids" sign would be taken as tongue in cheek in the other direction either, when expressing an opposing view is "violence". 

 

I seem to remember "decapitate terfs" was another delightful message a while back, unfortunately captured behind a photo of MSPs for posterity.  With a bit of tongue in cheek guillotine art work - nice. 

 

 

 

 

[Zern]

3 hours ago, f_c_dundee said:

Not seen many "GC" protesters ever turning up masked like they're scared to be identified though.

 

No one invited the Nazis. I don't think you even believe that - it's just a convenient diversion. Same as no one invites dubious Antifa types to come and get involved, but they have turned up on "the other side" anyway, especially in the US.

 

The whole point of the Let Women Speak events is that anyone can rock up, there's no control over that. It was also the police in Australia, if I recall correctly, that were seen allowing the Nazi salute dudes up onto the steps...

 

There's no way that "arm trans kids" sign would be taken as tongue in cheek in the other direction either, when expressing an opposing view is "violence". 

 

I seem to remember "decapitate terfs" was another delightful message a while back, unfortunately captured behind a photo of MSPs for posterity.  With a bit of tongue in cheek guillotine art work - nice. 

 

 

 

 

lol, that's a lot of verbiage to distract from the fact that you did not need to invite the Nazis.

They heard what Posie has been saying and approve entirely of their own accord. They turned up to support the rhetoric, they like what is being said, and are totally down to clown when it comes to targeting minorities purely on the basis of identity.

It's kindof their whole thing.

[Zern]

It's a bit difficult to 'both sides' an issue like this when the Nazis are firmly on one side.

Trans supporting events are also open to all, and yet you have no examples of Nazis rocking up in support.

You do get a few objecting though. They usually stand near the GC lot.

Fascist adjacent.

[velo army]

4 hours ago, f_c_dundee said:

 

 

No one invited the Nazis. I don't think you even believe that - it's just a convenient diversion. Same as no one invites dubious Antifa types to come and get involved, but they have turned up on "the other side" anyway, especially in the US.

 

 

I've actually thought that you came across mostly reasonably, but the highlighted bit is utter nonsense and is an often used diversion by the Q-anon republican types. 

 

[Theroadlesstravelled]

15 hours ago, Zern said:

lol, that's a lot of verbiage to distract from the fact that you did not need to invite the Nazis.

They heard what Posie has been saying and approve entirely of their own accord. They turned up to support the rhetoric, they like what is being said, and are totally down to clown when it comes to targeting minorities purely on the basis of identity.

It's kindof their whole thing.

What the f**k is this shite?

[f_c_dundee]

15 hours ago, velo army said:

I've actually thought that you came across mostly reasonably, but the highlighted bit is utter nonsense and is an often used diversion by the Q-anon republican types. 

 

Aye fair play.

 

It has actually happened on a few occasions (e.g. during protests at the Wii Spa), but I think that both sets of extremists would latch on to any old shite for a bit of a stramash and drama. So both probably should be ignored as a distraction from the actual issues.

 

Defo no tin foil hat here or Q Anon leanings. Just eye rolling at the attempts to obscure the fact that it's a big group of middle aged mothers and young women that have driven a lot of this in the UK, not the right wing bampots.

 

In other news, hopefully someone has indeed got 'not an expert' Susie Green's number, now that the Tavistock have had to release the 300 pages of correspondence they didn't have with her/Mermaids. . 

 

https://archive.ph/2023.05.30-062440/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2023/05/30/the-cult-of-gender-ideology-finally-crumbling/

 

 

 

[vikingTON]

Oh great, I see this binfire of a thread has naturally descended from 'citing non-entities as leading authorities because I agree with them' to 'invoking Godwin's Law on a loop'.

[itzdrk]

20 hours ago, f_c_dundee said:

Not seen many "GC" protesters ever turning up masked like they're scared to be identified though.

 

No one invited the Nazis. I don't think you even believe that - it's just a convenient diversion. Same as no one invites dubious Antifa types to come and get involved, but they have turned up on "the other side" anyway, especially in the US.

 

The whole point of the Let Women Speak events is that anyone can rock up, there's no control over that. It was also the police in Australia, if I recall correctly, that were seen allowing the Nazi salute dudes up onto the steps...

 

There's no way that "arm trans kids" sign would be taken as tongue in cheek in the other direction either, when expressing an opposing view is "violence". 

 

I seem to remember "decapitate terfs" was another delightful message a while back, unfortunately captured behind a photo of MSPs for posterity.  With a bit of tongue in cheek guillotine art work - nice. 

 

 

 

 

I think we should bring 'decapitate terfs' into law. It should be illegal not to decapitate a terf.  

[Zern]

1 hour ago, Theroadlesstravelled said:

What the f**k is this shite?

Idiom.

Odd thing to object to.

I thought you were going away from this thread?

[f_c_dundee]

38 minutes ago, virginton said:

Oh great, I see this binfire of a thread has naturally descended from 'citing non-entities as leading authorities because I agree with them' to 'invoking Godwin's Law on a loop'.

Wasn't me started on about Nazis

 

I repeat, bringing extremist bampots of any variety up isn't really helping anyone.

 

 

[Zern]

21 minutes ago, virginton said:

Oh great, I see this binfire of a thread has naturally descended from 'citing non-entities as leading authorities because I agree with them' to 'invoking Godwin's Law on a loop'.

I think your misunderstanding what Godwin's law is describing.

There are appropriate places for discussion of Nazis. WW2 forums, History forums, Politics forums.

Hypothetically; if a bunch of Nazis turned up to support a Lib Dem conference, it would be weird to have someone criticise mention of that fact by citing Godwin's Law.

[velo army]

1 hour ago, f_c_dundee said:

Wasn't me started on about Nazis

 

I repeat, bringing extremist bampots of any variety up isn't really helping anyone.

 

 

"Antifa" aren't extremists though. They're anti-fascists. If you describe anti-fascism as an extreme position then you're revealing quite a bit about your own beliefs I think.