Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Fully Baked Left Wing Vegan Cookies

Options
1…1617192122…75

Comments

  • Options
    #542
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    orubiru wrote: »
    It's a strange one! My thought is that you'd really need to have someone who is from Mexico comment on whether or not this is offensive or racist or whatever.
    Well, the USPTO found that the name "Washington Redskins" was "disparaging to native Americans":

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/08/washington-football_n_7753018.html

    So a ban on sombreros + Mexicans seems about right.

    Should Irish people ban the depiction of leprechauns, pots of gold and shillelaghs lest somebody take offence?


  • Options
    #543
    orubiru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭orubiru


    robindch wrote: »
    Well, the USPTO found that the name "Washington Redskins" was "disparaging to native Americans":

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/08/washington-football_n_7753018.html

    So a ban on sombreros + Mexicans seems about right.

    Should Irish people ban the depiction of leprechauns, pots of gold and shillelaghs lest somebody take offence?

    Hm.

    I look at the Redskins article and think it sounds fair enough. I look at the sombreros thing and think that maybe it is "problematic" but maybe it isn't. Then I take the Irish example and think "nah, it's ridiculous to think of banning that".

    So obviously I have some kind of bias there? I don't know where that comes from.


  • Options
    #544
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    orubiru wrote: »
    As far as I can tell these "SJW" types have just figured out where creationists and Christians failed to preserve the credibility of their beliefs as soon as they hit the internet and have made moves to ensure that the same doesn't happen to them. They are of course still free to abuse, harass and troll others because the others that they are going after do not have the same level of public sympathy and so the fear of being shamed or called out just isn't there.

    Seriously though, how come so many outspoken Atheists end up becoming people who speak out against Feminism or other "SJW" type stuff? Is it just that Religious arguments become tedious and repetitive after a while and the "Social Justice Community" is pretty much constantly providing new questionable material?

    you are making me feel sorry for creationists :D

    I dont think they (SJWs) have figured out anything as such more that the far left is not known for embracing values like free speech , so it would be more natural for them to want to quell descent and play into the whole politically correct culture.
    I think from a trending perspective "internet Atheism" may have peaked , there are only so many videos that you can make debunking Noah after all and things like gay marriage are running their course so there is not much else up for grabs. Islam I guess needs its own "new Atheist" trend but thats for them to organise.
    I'd go with the view that you will get an alliance of moderate left and right going after feminists and progressives in general.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #545
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    robindch wrote: »
    Well, the USPTO found that the name "Washington Redskins" was "disparaging to native Americans":

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/08/washington-football_n_7753018.html

    So a ban on sombreros + Mexicans seems about right.

    Should Irish people ban the depiction of leprechauns, pots of gold and shillelaghs lest somebody take offence?

    Depictions yeah, just not the real thing. Its a well known fact you won't get a pot of gold away from a leprechaun unless you bate the head offof him with a shillelagh.


  • Options
    #546
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,242 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    From here:
    Richard Maudslay, chairman of the British Mexican Society, told The Independent: “These are not ‘funny hats’ in Mexico but are a part of national costume which are worn in several contexts, including traditional Mexican rodeos (charreria) and musicians (mariachis) and are sold to visitors from all over the world.

    “No Mexican we know would oppose these being given out by a restaurant trying to attract people to savour Mexican cuisine.”

    Looks like Mexican people in the UK don't seem bothered by it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #547
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,097 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    silverharp wrote: »
    Islam I guess needs its own "new Atheist" trend but thats for them to organise.

    Good luck with that.

    The ex-Muslim Britons who are persecuted for being atheists - BBC News

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #548
    strelok
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,162 ✭✭✭strelok


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    From here:


    Looks like Mexican people in the UK don't seem bothered by it.

    that's not important. middle class white people are bothered by it on their behalf.


  • Options
    #549
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Good luck with that.

    The ex-Muslim Britons who are persecuted for being atheists - BBC News

    there are a few UK based anonymous youtube channels , its a start

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #550
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,097 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    silverharp wrote: »
    there are a few UK based anonymous youtube channels , its a start

    Yes but the fact they have to be anonymous says it all really.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #551
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/trevor-macdonald/transphobia-in-the-midwif_b_8131520.html?ir=Australia

    Gender neutral language to describe pregnant women people gets a backlash from some Midwifes.
    The Midwives Alliance of North America (MANA) formerly referred to clients as "women" and "mothers," but in 2014 changed some (but not all) language in its core competencies document to refer to "pregnant people" and "birthing individuals." The new gender-neutral language recognizes that some transgender, genderqueer and intersex individuals may require midwifery care and do not identify as women. Now, a group of midwives, including the revered Ina May, calling themselves Woman-Centred Midwifery is condemning the changes. In an Open Letter to MANA, the dissenting midwives write, "women are all but missing from the language" due to the "erasure" of the word "woman." Over 1000 people have already signed a response letter in support of MANA.
    In a nutshell, the open letter says that trans guys who give birth are not men; they are women because of their biology.

    The above statement is highly offensive to trans individuals because it denies our gender. Also, it implies that the care provider decides the identity of the client, rather than listening to the client and forming a respectful relationship. It places a burden of conformity on all people who give birth.

    Not sure about this one. Like can anyone else but 'women' give birth? If a man/person gives birth, are they not a woman?
    We do not need to choose between celebrating women and including people of all genders. Why can't midwives serve "women and people of all genders?" Organizations trying to grapple with respecting the feminist legacy of midwifery care while using inclusive language should be generous with their ink. Queer folks have done well to add more letters to our "alphabet soup" LGBTTQIA acronym. We can all handle a few more letters.

    He speaks for all but can we? Tbh its no wonder people are so medicated if nobody knows what the hell they are supposed to do anymore in social circles deem they offend someone or find something offensive. What does TQWIA stand for anyway?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #552
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,719 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    jank wrote: »

    He speaks for all but can we? Tbh its no wonder people are so medicated if nobody knows what the hell they are supposed to do anymore in social circles deem they offend someone or find something offensive. What does TQWIA stand for anyway?

    From what I can find, LBGTTQIA : Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transsexual, Queer or Questioning, Intersex or Intergender, Asexual or Ally.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #553
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    jank wrote: »
    Like can anyone else but 'women' give birth? If a man/person gives birth, are they not a woman?
    I'm not sure that calling people by one name or another influences how one's body works. If somebody wants to call themselves a woman, a man, transgender or whatever - why not leave them do it?

    There's a lot more to sexuality than the body's ability to give birth to a baby, though I imagine our religious friends and colleagues would disagree with that.


  • Options
    #554
    orubiru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭orubiru


    robindch wrote: »
    I'm not sure that calling people by one name or another influences how one's body works. If somebody wants to call themselves a woman, a man, transgender or whatever - why not leave them do it?

    There's a lot more to sexuality than the body's ability to give birth to a baby, though I imagine our religious friends and colleagues would disagree with that.

    Yeah, I agree with this. If people want to be called a certain thing then as long as it is not obviously ridiculous then I'd say just let them get on with it.

    I suppose there is a problem if someone aggressively corrects you for saying "pregnant woman" instead of "birthing individual" because sometimes how can you realistically be expected to know?

    I mean if I refer to someone as "her" when I should have used "zir" then I am OK with being politely corrected. I am not OK with an aggressive attitude implying I am some kind of horrible bigot because I got it wrong.

    Otherwise, it's basically harmless and surely it's just good manners to call someone by whatever they want to be called.

    It seems pretty obvious now that sexuality is a lot more complicated than most of us ever realized. So it follows that things are way more complicated than the basic understanding that most of us were taught and/or raised with.

    I'm assuming that the natural consequence, if people are aggressively correcting people for using the wrong pronouns etc, is that the language will evolve to not use pronouns at all.


  • Options
    #555
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    'From now on I want you all to call me Loretta'.


  • Options
    #556
    Shrap
    Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    orubiru wrote: »
    I'm assuming that the natural consequence, if people are aggressively correcting people for using the wrong pronouns etc, is that the language will evolve to not use pronouns at all.
    Was never "aggressively" corrected myself, but I've pretty much done this anyway. Company regardless, I call everyone lads. Male/female gathering: Lads, what are we doing :D ? All female: Are ye alright there lads :p ? All male: Ah lads..... :(
    It shall be known, henceforth (as my friends and acquaintances already know), that I have taken it upon myself to use lads as an entirely gender-neutral term. Hijacked it, if you will.
    pauldla wrote: »
    'From now on I want you all to call me Loretta'.

    Grand Loretta.


  • Options
    #557
    Shrap
    Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    robindch wrote: »
    Should Irish people ban the depiction of leprechauns, pots of gold and shillelaghs lest somebody take offence?

    I'm offended, but do I care?

    No.


  • Options
    #558
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    pauldla wrote: »
    'From now on I want you all to call me Loretta'.

    splitter.


  • Options
    #559
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,133 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    orubiru wrote: »
    Yeah, I agree with this. If people want to be called a certain thing then as long as it is not obviously ridiculous then I'd say just let them get on with it.

    I suppose there is a problem if someone aggressively corrects you for saying "pregnant woman" instead of "birthing individual" because sometimes how can you realistically be expected to know? . . .
    That's not what's going on here, though. Nobody is "aggressively correcting" anybody.

    Most people who give birth identify as women; a few do not. There is no problem about using the term "woman" to refer to a person who identifies as a woman, and the Midwives Alliance does not suggest there is. But when referring collectively to the clients of midwives, they don't like "women", etc, because the client population includes some who identify as women, and some who do not. Hence, "pregnant people".
    orubiru wrote: »
    I'm assuming that the natural consequence, if people are aggressively correcting people for using the wrong pronouns etc, is that the language will evolve to not use pronouns at all.
    I think it t will just lead to a trend (or accelerate an existing trend?) towards the use of inclusive pronouns - e.g. "they" meaning "he or she". We already do this quite a lot.


  • Options
    #560
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,097 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    "..pregnant person.."

    "But! But! I don't identify as human"

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #561
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,133 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    "But! But! I don't identify as human"
    I'll bear that in mind, Hotblack.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #562
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,131 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Woman, female, lady are nouns referring to adult human beings who are biologically female; that is, capable of bearing offspring.

    So if you are a human being capable of bearing offspring you are inevitably a woman


  • Options
    #563
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    "..pregnant person.."

    "But! But! I don't identify as human"


    You want to sit on an egg for 9 months, then all I can do is respect your diversity.


  • Options
    #564
    BlaasForRafa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭BlaasForRafa


    That dingbat diversity officer from Goldsmiths college is back in the news again after tweeting the hashtag #killallwhitemen

    Now I'm not a fan of arresting or prosecuting people for sending tweets, it seems like a waste of police and CPS time, although locking her away for being a silly idiot is rather tempting.


  • Options
    #565
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,097 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Yeah but that would put intolerable pressure on prison places

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #566
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    its funny how christians and regressives go after the same things


    http://6abc.com/education/new-jersey-school-cancels-halloween-parties/1045540/
    MAPLEWOOD, N.J. (WPVI) -- There will be no little ghosts and goblins at an elementary school in North Jersey this year.

    They won't get to celebrate Halloween.

    Administrators aren't allowing any parties because they say some students of different cultures felt left out in past years.

    A letter went home to parents of students at Seth Boyden Elementary in Maplewood.

    The school tried to cancel the parties last year, but there was outrage and they were ultimately allowed to go on as planned.

    But, this year no parties.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #567
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Remember when Harry Potter pissed off some of the evangelicals? Reminds me of this.

    As mentioned before, horseshoe effect. The pendulum has swung wildly to the far left. Before religion and their clerics were the moral arbitrators of western societies. Now we have self appointed 'equality' and 'human rights' officials and officers who are the moral arbitrators and the outcomes are sadly similar.

    A title of Fr. or Rev. garnered tremendous respect in the past and one would have to be brave to speak out against their moral overtures on how society should behave and be shaped in a certain vision. Now, swap it with 'equality officer' or 'human rights lawyer'. It is not worth going up against them as one is risking permanently being ostracised via twitter as sure, who would want to speak out against equality or human rights!

    In some ways I think society has moved on so much in the past 30 years. In other ways I see us basically living in the 50's only with different masters.


  • Options
    #568
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    The University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee has set up an "Inclusive Excellence Center" whose main product is buzzwords:
    IEC wrote:
    The Inclusive Excellence Center (IEC) is committed to cultivating an intercultural, equitable climate and learning environment for all UW-Milwaukee members. As a student-centered entity, the IEC appreciates diversity and strives for excellence in fostering peer-to-peer connections and critically reflective opportunities through initiatives, experiences, and collaborations. The IEC will invest time to create a socially just campus in order to include different perspectives, engage in authentic and challenging dialogue, and connect vibrant and global communities. [...] The Inclusive Excellence Center is the next necessary step in the evolutionary process of creating a more equitable campus climate by facilitating a welcome and inviting community and provide support for other UWM groups.Through our efforts we hope to develop a rich tradition of collective involvement and equity to ensure folks feel included, engaged, and connected.
    Buzzwords aside, they've decided that, amongst others, the following words or phrases amount to "microaggressions" and should be avoided lest somebody's feelings be hurt:
    • Third World
    • Ghetto
    • Crazy
    • Are you deaf?
    • Man up
    • Thug
    • Thot
    • Politically Correct
    With online-report-form goodness here.

    Anyway folks, you heard it here first - the term "politically correct" is no longer politically correct.


  • Options
    #569
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    robindch wrote: »
    The University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee has set up an "Inclusive Excellence Center" whose main product is buzzwords:Buzzwords aside, they've decided that, amongst others, the following words or phrases amount to "microaggressions" and should be avoided lest somebody's feelings be hurt:
    • Third World
    • Ghetto
    • Crazy
    • Are you deaf?
    • Man up
    • Thug
    • Thot
    • Politically Correct
    With online-report-form goodness here.

    Anyway folks, you heard it here first - the term "politically correct" is no longer politically correct.

    Jaysus help them on a building site. Or within five miles of me.

    Thot is a new one to me at least.


  • Options
    #570
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,844 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    THOT = That Ho Over There.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #571
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    THOT = That Ho Over There.

    3jxt8jccta3mvpflaes4grpz2.350x350x4.gif


Advertisement