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

LGBT Awards

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    NollagShona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭NollagShona


    McCrack wrote: »
    They dont unless certain prerequisites are met specifically they must live with the mother for at least one year and three months with the newborn

    Otherwise if there is no consent by the mother the unmarried father has to apply to the district court

    Yes, where his right of guardianship can be established


  • Options
    #63
    NollagShona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭NollagShona


    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    John Inman would get my vote. I dont think any LGBT person has ever topped him, although Lieutenant Gruber in Allo Allo made a good run at it.

    How drole


  • Options
    #64
    Saruhashi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 591 ✭✭✭Saruhashi


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    But can a TERF identify as Queer? That just makes no sense at all

    Why can't they identify as Queer?

    Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist.

    Unless Queer and Trans are the same thing, which they are not, then there is no contradiction here.

    I have a harder time understanding how RADICAL Feminism isn't trans-exclusionary by default. Surely men who have transitioned women and who then seek prominent positions in the Feminist movement would be treated with some level of suspicion based on the fact that they once were men?

    For me, thats wrong and a trans-woman is a woman but for a radical feminist? I can see a potential issue there.

    Can you explain:
    Why a TERF cannot identify as Queer?
    How radical feminism is not fundamentally trans-exclusionary?


  • Options
    #65
    Pac1Man
    Registered Users Posts: 4,394 ✭✭✭Pac1Man


    Is there a difference between queer and gay?


  • Options
    #66
    NollagShona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭NollagShona


    Pac1Man wrote: »
    Is there a difference between queer and gay?

    Queer is a separate subsection of LGBTQ+ in modern parlance

    Previously they were synonyms


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    McCrack
    Registered Users Posts: 2,968 ✭✭✭McCrack


    NollagShona wrote: »
    Yes, where his right of guardianship can be established

    But its not an automatic right

    A court can refuse the application


  • Options
    #68
    NollagShona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭NollagShona


    McCrack wrote: »
    But its not an automatic right

    A court can refuse the application

    Only if there are sufficient grounds to. But if the father hasn’t wronged in law he will get guardianship


  • Options
    #69
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    NollagShona wrote: »
    If the right is established it’s automatic

    Right, let's end this or maybe start another thread.

    For the record, no. Fathers do not have an automatic right as guardians of their children, unless they are married to the mother at the time of birth.

    If not, and in the event of separation, then fathers will have to go to court to gain guardianship, unless the mother willingly signs a document agreeing that the father is the guardian too.

    Souce:
    Me, I went through it only a few years ago. Despite both children having my surname and my being named on their birth certificates.


  • Options
    #70
    NollagShona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭NollagShona


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    Right, let's end this or maybe start another thread.

    For the record, no. Fathers do not have an automatic right as guardians of their children, unless they are married to the mother at the time of birth.

    If not, and in the event of separation, then fathers will have to go to court to gain guardianship, unless the mother willingly signs a document agreeing that the father is the guardian too.

    Souce:
    Me, I went through it only a few years ago. Despite both children having my surname and my being named on their birth certificates.

    The law has changed recently in legislation brought in by Min Shatter

    http://treoir.ie/target-fathers.php

    They may have to go to court but once it’s established the father has a right to guardianship


  • Options
    #71
    Ursummupet
    Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭Ursummupet


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    Right, let's end this or maybe start another thread.

    For the record, no. Fathers do not have an automatic right as guardians of their children, unless they are married to the mother at the time of birth.

    If not, and in the event of separation, then fathers will have to go to court to gain guardianship, unless the mother willingly signs a document agreeing that the father is the guardian too.

    Souce:
    Me, I went through it only a few years ago. Despite both children having my surname and my being named on their birth certificates.

    Did that not change in 2016?

    My understanding being that the fathers name on the birth certificate automatically granted him guardianship in the unwanted event?...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    NollagShona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭NollagShona


    Ursummupet wrote: »
    Did that not change in 2016?

    My understanding being that the fathers name on the birth certificate automatically granted him guardianship in the unwanted event?...

    Even without the name, if parenthood can be established he will almost certainly be given guardianship


  • Options
    #73
    Ursummupet
    Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭Ursummupet


    NollagShona wrote: »
    Even without the name, if parenthood can be established he will almost certainly be given guardianship

    So a paternity test will do?


  • Options
    #74
    NollagShona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭NollagShona


    Ursummupet wrote: »
    So a paternity test will do?

    Ask a solicitor


  • Options
    #75
    Ursummupet
    Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭Ursummupet


    Ok. Nice knowing you.


  • Options
    #76
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Really? And they identify as queer?
    Saruhashi wrote: »
    Why can't they identify as Queer?

    Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist.

    Unless Queer and Trans are the same thing, which they are not, then there is no contradiction here.

    I have a harder time understanding how RADICAL Feminism isn't trans-exclusionary by default. Surely men who have transitioned women and who then seek prominent positions in the Feminist movement would be treated with some level of suspicion based on the fact that they once were men?

    For me, thats wrong and a trans-woman is a woman but for a radical feminist? I can see a potential issue there.

    Can you explain:
    Why a TERF cannot identify as Queer?
    How radical feminism is not fundamentally trans-exclusionary?

    Don't look at Joeytheparrot's posts as being honest questions or surprised astonishment , rather its a rhetorical and symbolic.

    Simple answer is, they have been on this site for a long long time, they moderate the LGBT forum, this forum used to be the LGB forum, there was a lot of nastyness and genuine transphobia and loads of arguments AFAIK.

    This thread here is enlightening, its an old one but its only ten years ago yet we can see how different the responses are, including from a lot of Mods and Admins etc.
    This surprise at TERF style attitudes is simply whitewashing the fact that only a decade ago on this site this topic was genuinely a divisive issue among the various interested parties and by no means clearly cut that there was only one acceptable opinion.

    I'm not personally invested in this as not a member of any of those communities but its very interesting to see how whats considered an acceptable opinion has changed, and more importantly the fact that the questions involved themselves have been de-legitimized, its not that often that we see change of this speed.
    Thats why the responses are framed this way, its not "well I strongly disagree", its "I'm shocked somebody call themselves queer and have that attitude", its about removing the validity of the topic itself and erasing the fact that the defacto position only 10 years ago here was something thats unspeakable now.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055109175

    ps I don't actually know what opinions they had on this topic back then


  • Options
    #77
    um7y1h83ge06nx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,029 ✭✭✭um7y1h83ge06nx


    I find these awards a little hard to understand too as I don't see what any LGBTQ person feels the need to be an outsider. Times have changed and most people I know have no prejudice against any LGBTQ person.

    Granted there are a surely a few haters out there still but they must be in a minority.


  • Options
    #78
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,816 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Saruhashi wrote: »
    Why can't they identify as Queer?

    Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist.

    Unless Queer and Trans are the same thing, which they are not, then there is no contradiction here.

    I have a harder time understanding how RADICAL Feminism isn't trans-exclusionary by default. Surely men who have transitioned women and who then seek prominent positions in the Feminist movement would be treated with some level of suspicion based on the fact that they once were men?

    For me, thats wrong and a trans-woman is a woman but for a radical feminist? I can see a potential issue there.

    Can you explain:
    Why a TERF cannot identify as Queer?
    How radical feminism is not fundamentally trans-exclusionary?

    Queer identity often completely rejects the idea of traditional gender identity altogether along with many under the trans umbrella so it really makes no sense to me that someone who identifies as Queer would be trans exclusionary.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer

    I honestly have not got a clue why 10 year old threads are being dragged in here. Ireland and boards.ie have significantly changed since then.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #79
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    I miss the old Boards, straight from the go Boards


  • Options
    #80
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    How on earth did this turn into another thread about the much endangered white male?


  • Options
    #81
    Hande hoche!
    Registered Users Posts: 7,453 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    pilly wrote: »
    How on earth did this turn into another thread about the much endangered white male?
    That was the first third. It moved onto Terfs and queers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    Hande hoche! wrote: »
    That was the first third. It moved onto Terfs and queers.

    I didn't even know what a TERF was until I read this thread.

    I find it shocking that now people are not allowed have an opinion on ANYTHING unless it's the socially acceptable one though.


  • Options
    #83
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,044 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    pilly wrote: »
    I didn't even know what a TERF was until I read this thread.

    I find it shocking that now people are not allowed have an opinion on ANYTHING unless it's the socially acceptable one though.

    This isn't true - people think that because they don't know how to express said opinion in a debate that they aren't allowed to have said opinion. There's a difference.

    The other technique is the shout loudly, make up **** and verbally abuse your opponent, which is the one employed by the radical feminists and other SJWs.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #84
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »
    This isn't true - people think that because they don't know how to express said opinion in a debate that they aren't allowed to have said opinion. There's a difference.

    I don't get you?


  • Options
    #85
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,111 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    pilly wrote: »
    I didn't even know what a TERF was until I read this thread.

    I find it shocking that now people are not allowed have an opinion on ANYTHING unless it's the socially acceptable one though.

    This. Stating that there are biological differences between males and females that don't change depending on how the person identifies is enough to get you labelled a "terf" nowadays (if you're a woman)


  • Options
    #86
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,816 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    This. Stating that there are biological differences between males and females that don't change depending on how the person identifies is enough to get you labelled a "terf" nowadays (if you're a woman)

    And?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #87
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,044 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    pilly wrote: »
    I don't get you?

    People are allowed to express any opinion they want. If the cannot express it, they claim that they aren't allowed.

    There's a difference between not able and not allowed.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



Advertisement