Jonathan Clynch of RTE Radio News to become Jonathan Rachel Clynch #See post 1/81#

bbability

He joined the job as a man so he should continue to work and be employed as a man. This person can do what he wants when he clocks out in the evening.

Bellerstring

Nody wrote: »

//MOD

Since some people appear to have a slight issues with reading let me make this 100% clear:

Try to be "funny" about Jonathan Rachel Clynch gender (or anyone else in similar situation) or bash him about it and you WILL be banned. There is very clearly outlined in the charter and multiple people are serving bans inc. permanent bans due to this. If you are so bloody insecure and immature that you can't handle the topic then I suggest you crawl back into your cave and never back out until you've matured and grown up.

//MOD

Not insecure or immature, just have a different point of view from you.
That's the purpose of these boards, that we don't all have to sail in the same ship.

ShoulderChip

bbability wrote: »

He joined the job as a man so he should continue to work and be employed as a man. This person can do what he wants when he clocks out in the evening.

Wow! do fat people have to stay fat?, do single people have to stay single? in order to protect the fact that their employer may have hired them due to some sort of discrimination too?

Annasopra

ShoulderChip wrote: »

Wow! do fat people have to stay fat?, do single people have to stay single? in order to protect the fact that their employer may have hired them due to some sort of discrimination too?

Of course not and trans people transition in the workplace too!!

c montgomery

ShoulderChip wrote: »

Wow! do fat people have to stay fat?, do single people have to stay single? in order to protect the fact that their employer may have hired them due to
some sort of discrimination too?

Your being ridiculous now.

He would be expected to be as professional as the day he was hired. Arriving in wearing a dress calling himself Rachel does not strike me as professional.

Canadel

Omackeral wrote: »

Especially on such an occasion? That's the whole point. That's specifically an occasion where decorum is called for. You'd feel sorry for me would you? That's some amout of bending over backwards to show how tolerant you are. You have no idea how I live my life by the way. I am onside for plenty of things seen as liberal or left wing. I welcome refugees, I voted yes for marriage equality, I dont think Travellers are all bad folks. But if some fella decides he's gonna show up in a dress at someone's funeral, I'm gonna bet that 99% of people are gonna question it. No actually do you know what? 100% of people are gonna question it. It'll be a topic of discussion. You can go ahead and feel sorry for whoever you want and say "oh I wouldn't even notice" in your attempt at being oh so accepting of everything, EVERYTHING but you really just come off as either deluded and smug or else a bit of a liar.

My point was it's an occasion where something as trivial as the funeral director's attire is largely irrelevant one would think. Of course I would notice it, I just wouldn't really care. Sure, people might question it, but isn't that the whole point in the first place? Questioning our own perceptions of normality and what is right and wrong. Of course you would argue that a funeral is no place to be making such a stance (and you have a point there) but to say 100% of people agree with you is simply not true.

BuilderPlumber

Jonathan Clynch is clearly a man. I do not believe there is such a thing as gender fluid. It is instead that some people want to be of the opposite sex because they do not share the stereotypical interests of other men with them.

I was reading an article about this girl who also now claims to be so-called gender fluid. Her arguments rested on being interested in action toys and sport as a child. Her sister had more 'girly' interests. So, all the women I know who play football and watch Love/Hate must be gender fluid!!!!!!

Jonathan Clynch's move is very career orientated. I never heard of him until now and he has become a household name by giving himself an invented minority status. He will be on Tubridy telling us about his experience and his star will rise.

Trick of the Tail

...whereas in reality, and to the general public, all he is is a nondescript, average tv reporter.

Who should not involve the customers of his product in his personal life, no more than any of us do, and should instead shut up about it and get on with his job.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

BuilderPlumber

Trick of the Tail wrote: »

...whereas in reality, and to the general public, all he is is a nondescript, average tv reporter.

Who should not involve the customers of his product in his personal life, no more than any of us do, and should instead shut up about it and get on with his job.

Precisely ... someone I had not even heard of until now either. However, all this so-called 'gender fluid' thing takes him to a new dimension. His star will rise and he will get any media job he wants as his new created minority status means he cannot be discriminated against. He could also go into politics as Ireland's first 'fluid gender' TD!

He is merely one of many individuals using the media to further their careers and make themselves more wellknown. Everyone from John Waters to Panti have done so, so why not him.

hinault

StonyIron wrote: »

Non-traditional gender identity is something that people are simply going to have to get over

:rolleyes:

looksee

I just looked up the definition of gender-fluid. I had been reading the topic with a reasonable understanding of it, but wondered what the actual definition is.

Someone who is gender-fluid sometimes feels male and sometimes feels female. OK. So how does someone who is essentially, say, female know what it 'feels' like to feel male, if they are not actually male. How do they know what 'feeling' female feels like? I just feel like a person.

Many women now live in trousers, is that something that makes them doubtful of their gender? Are you gender fluid because some days you feel like wearing a skirt and tights and some days you wear jeans?

I can understand how someone can have been raised in the 'wrong' sex and might feel the need to change, but that is a different situation.

The gender fluid thing seems manipulative, it sounds more like making an issue of your mood. You are basically causing everyone around you to acknowledge your mood and respond to it. 'Now pay attention everyone, I am being female today so make sure you treat me like a female by...um...calling me a different name!' Bit like you might go into work and announce 'I am irritable today, so don't expect me to be polite to the customers' or 'I am feeling bright and cheerful, so I don't want any problems, just nice stuff. Me, me, me!

So what if you feel different genders on different days? Just accept it and get on with your life. Why the need for making a production of wearing, say, a dress if you are a guy, why do you need a dress to feel female? Its not really about a guy wearing a dress, - easy enough to establish a fashion for men wearing skirts - its about a person trying to control other people by demanding they respect his or her different moods on a daily basis.

MTBD

Imagine if I came into work one day and said "Please call me Jonthan Tupac Clynch. I have always felt that my pale skin and red hair have belied what is actually underneath. I relate to the ghetto life of Tupac and Biggie, like to call my girlfriends hoes and spontaneously back flip as a celebration when I score a goal. These are not the attributes of whiteys although sometimes I do like to work in an office and drink tea from little china cups. Therefore I believe I am race-fluid."

You'd be A) laughed out of the building and branded a racist for harboring views which have such a narrow definition of what a culture/race represents. The very people who are calling people homophobes would be disgusted by a white person claiming they were black. Why is it any different when gender is the topic? Jonathan Clynch doesnt have a clue what it is to be a woman, neither do I or any other male. They are simply borderline sexists who have very stereotypical views on what it is to be male/female. Its outrageous stuff that this is being pedalled as some sort of human rights issue.

I dont think they should be chastised or vilified but a large proportion of the population will never accept that this is anything other than a peculiar trait in people with deep rooted issues. And I'd consider myself fairly liberal on these issues....

ShoulderChip

looksee wrote: »

I just looked up the definition of gender-fluid. I had been reading the topic with a reasonable understanding of it, but wondered what the actual definition is.

Someone who is gender-fluid sometimes feels male and sometimes feels female. OK. So how does someone who is essentially, say, female know what it 'feels' like to feel male, if they are not actually male. How do they know what 'feeling' female feels like? I just feel like a person.

Many women now live in trousers, is that something that makes them doubtful of their gender? Are you gender fluid because some days you feel like wearing a skirt and tights and some days you wear jeans?

I can understand how someone can have been raised in the 'wrong' sex and might feel the need to change, but that is a different situation.

The gender fluid thing seems manipulative, it sounds more like making an issue of your mood. You are basically causing everyone around you to acknowledge your mood and respond to it. 'Now pay attention everyone, I am being female today so make sure you treat me like a female by...um...calling me a different name!' Bit like you might go into work and announce 'I am irritable today, so don't expect me to be polite to the customers' or 'I am feeling bright and cheerful, so I don't want any problems, just nice stuff. Me, me, me!

So what if you feel different genders on different days? Just accept it and get on with your life. Why the need for making a production of wearing, say, a dress if you are a guy, why do you need a dress to feel female? Its not really about a guy wearing a dress, - easy enough to establish a fashion for men wearing skirts - its about a person trying to control other people by demanding they respect his or her different moods on a daily basis.

you ask why the need to make a production of wearing a dress if you are a guy, but can they not just equally ask, I am a guy wearing a dress, why can you not just accept that and not make a production out of it / react to ti. it wasn't too long ago that society dictated that men should wear pink and girls blue, can you not just let people be/dress/act like they feel they are/want to be?

And to play devil's advocate if they are attention seeking, then if you / society acts in a calm civilised manner and doesn't panic when they see a man in a dress, then surely they wont get a kick out of it, and will not continue this behaviour so it is a win win mentality for the naysayers.

Personally I find this whole notion of societal expectation insane, like why are so many women going around in shoes which are horribly uncomfortable bad for their health and hard to walk in, why are we allowing this to happen? why are humans choosing to behave in this way, I hope for their sake they enjoy it, but feel like some may have it forced upon them by the expectation of their peers or to find a man who just wants to see their assets on display.

looksee

ShoulderChip wrote: »

you ask why the need to make a production of wearing a dress if you are a guy, but can they not just equally ask, I am a guy wearing a dress, why can you not just accept that and not make a production out of it / react to ti. it wasn't too long ago that society dictated that men should wear pink and girls blue, can you not just let people be/dress/act like they feel they are/want to be?

And to play devil's advocate if they are attention seeking, then if you / society acts in a calm civilised manner and doesn't panic when they see a man in a dress, then surely they wont get a kick out of it, and will not continue this behaviour so it is a win win mentality for the naysayers.

Personally I find this whole notion of societal expectation insane, like why are so many women going around in shoes which are horribly uncomfortable bad for their health and hard to walk in, why are we allowing this to happen? why are humans choosing to behave in this way, I hope for their sake they enjoy it, but feel like some may have it forced upon them by the expectation of their peers or to find a man who just wants to see their assets on display.

I don't actually care how people dress, that is not the issue.

The issue is that there could be a perception that I have to take their indecision seriously and be careful to know how to speak to them or treat them.

I also could object to a man (for example) floating between being a man and a woman without having any experience of the issues of either sex - it is convenient to be a man - to get a job for example, fine I'm a man. I feel like having people treating me as cute and a little bit helpless, ok I'll be a woman. But not too much of either, just cherry pick the best bits.

ShoulderChip

looksee wrote: »

I don't actually care how people dress, that is not the issue.

The issue is that there could be a perception that I have to take their indecision seriously and be careful to know how to speak to them or treat them.

I also could object to a man (for example) floating between being a man and a woman without having any experience of the issues of either sex - it is convenient to be a man - to get a job for example, fine I'm a man. I feel like having people treating me as cute and a little bit helpless, ok I'll be a woman. But not too much of either, just cherry pick the best bits.

Right, but to be fair there is so much stigma about the topic that I doubt the societal advantages of either in a particular situation outweigh the current social backlash / dogma enough for it to be warranted as a logical course of action for someone to take as opposed to a raw illogical human emotional decision.
I doubt too many Irish mammys would suggest that their daughters dress up as men for an interview, nor that the daughters would do so for a myriad of reasons.

Omackeral

MTBD wrote: »

Imagine if I came into work one day and said "Please call me Jonthan Tupac Clynch. I have always felt that my pale skin and red hair have belied what is actually underneath. I relate to the ghetto life of Tupac and Biggie, like to call my girlfriends hoes and spontaneously back flip as a celebration when I score a goal. These are not the attributes of whiteys although sometimes I do like to work in an office and drink tea from little china cups. Therefore I believe I am race-fluid."

You'd be A) laughed out of the building and branded a racist for harboring views which have such a narrow definition of what a culture/race represents. The very people who are calling people homophobes would be disgusted by a white person claiming they were black. Why is it any different when gender is the topic? Jonathan Clynch doesnt have a clue what it is to be a woman, neither do I or any other male. They are simply borderline sexists who have very stereotypical views on what it is to be male/female. Its outrageous stuff that this is being pedalled as some sort of human rights issue.

I dont think they should be chastised or vilified but a large proportion of the population will never accept that this is anything other than a peculiar trait in people with deep rooted issues. And I'd consider myself fairly liberal on these issues....

I felt like that coming after watching Straight Outta Compton.

looksee

ShoulderChip wrote: »

Right, but to be fair there is so much stigma about the topic that I doubt the societal advantages of either in a particular situation outweigh the current social backlash / dogma enough for it to be warranted as a logical course of action for someone to take as opposed to a raw illogical human emotional decision.
I doubt too many Irish mammys would suggest that their daughters dress up as men for an interview, nor that the daughters would do so for a myriad of reasons.

No doubt you are correct, but that is a whole different argument.

donaghs

StonyIron wrote: »

I just don't see the relevance. I work with men and women all the time and I really don't go around wondering about their maleness or femaleness all day.

But clearly Jonathan Rachel Clynch doesn't think that gender difference is irrelevant. Its very important them if they feel the need to "identify" and "dress" "as a man" in one instance, or "as a woman" in others.

Rather than working out all the permutations of this precedent all aspects of life (schools, public toilets, prisons, etc), wouldn't it make more sense to abolish the concept of gender? (and let people call themselves what they want). For medical reasons it might make sense to retain chromosomal "sex" categories.