Calls for Graham Linehan to be removed from Prime Debate on transgender issues!

jmayo

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

...
What celebrities/left leaning media people where wheeled out on Prime Time specifically to give their wholly inexpert views?

Eh how many times was Liam Cunningham, an actor, on various current affair shows voicing his supposed expert opinion on immigration and migrants ?

From recollection he was on current affairs programs a couple of times.


The transgender debate seems to be getting quite nasty.
Watching documentary on British TV channel a while back, a debate being held had bouncers trying to keep one gang of loonies out and ended up with police being called.

And there seems to be real hatred amongst some trans people for anyone who isn't and you end up with the lunacy where some ones complain women from birth can't now speak for females. :rolleyes:

A few things that leap out for me from all the recent debates.
Children should not be transitioned, they are not capable of making that decision.
Former males should not be allowed compete in physical sports against born females.
We should not be creating a myriad of gender descriptions to suit everyone and anyone.

Adults can transition all they want.
Good luck to them.

tritium

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And same for the whole gay thing, presumably? Let's make sure that teenagers don't feel accepted or anything?

Hell of a difference between accepting someone’s choice of sexual partners and advocating for letting someone jump right in to massive and potentially irreversible changes tbh but you go right ahead with that straw man.

Though tbh being anything beyond supportive and there for teens on their sexuality is also a no no for me. The analogy in your example would be actively taking your kids to gay bars/ strip clubs to make sure they got a full experience nice and early rather than actually making sure they had the information to make their decision in a measured way rather than rush in without time to build experience and understand their feelings properly.

AndrewJRenko

jmayo wrote: »

Eh how many times was Liam Cunningham, an actor, on various current affair shows voicing his supposed expert opinion on immigration and migrants ?

From recollection he was on current affairs programs a couple of times.

Eh, he wasn't on Prime Time. And immigration is not abortion or marriage equality.

AndrewJRenko

jmayo wrote: »

A few things that leap out for me from all the recent debates.
Children should not be transitioned, they are not capable of making that decision.

Not transitioning IS making a decision - a decision to spend those critical teenage years in a gender that is wrong for you.

Are they capable of making that decision?

Gravelly

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Eh, he wasn't on Prime Time. And immigration is not abortion or marriage equality.

Jaysus your poor back will be broken from moving those goalposts.

Annasopra

ceadaoin. wrote: »

It's a trans charity that actively campaigns for children to be able to transition. The woman in charge took her child to Thailand at the age of 16 for surgery. This is and was illegal in the UK, and is now illegal in Thailand. that's not ok. If you look into these things you'll find there's usually more to it than someone being a bigot.

Mermaids does not actively csmpaign for children to transition. You are just making that up.

Rory28

tritium wrote: »

Though tbh being anything beyond supportive and there for teens on their sexuality is also a no no for me. The analogy in your example would be actively taking your kids to gay bars/ strip clubs to make sure they got a full experience nice and early rather than actually making sure they had the information to make their decision in a measured way rather than rush in without time to build experience and understand their feelings properly.

You must have a low opinion of us if you think that is what being gay means. Jaysus

Gravelly

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Mermaids does not actively csmpaign for children to transition. You are just making that up.

You'd want to tell their Chief Executive that, she seems to take a different view:

https://twitter.com/green_susie100/status/1059817455395237888?s=09

tritium

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Eh, he wasn't on Prime Time. And immigration is not abortion or marriage equality.

Who the hell gave you the right to tell anyone what the hierarchy in social issues should be?

If anything immigration is a far more immediate and life or death question for a greater number of people.

tritium

Rory28 wrote: »

You must have a low opinion of us if you think that is what being gay means. Jaysus

I think you should probably reread my comment - I didn’t actually express any opinion of “you” or the LGB community.

jmayo

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Eh, he wasn't on Prime Time. And immigration is not abortion or marriage equality.

Ehh he was on some current affairs show dictating his opinion on a very relevant matter for this country and the EU.
He was being afford the same platform as politicians and supposed experts.
Why ?

And you know damn well that every tom, dick and mary celebrity had their opinions out there on both the abortion and marriage equality referendums.
Now of course they mightn't have been able to express them on Prime Time, but they were still being expressed on our national media.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Not transitioning IS making a decision - a decision to spend those critical teenage years in a gender that is wrong for you.

Are they capable of making that decision?

So what age should one be allowed make the decision to block their natural development and start development into an alternative gender ?

Should teenagers, who would often be described as being in the difficult years coming to terms with their bodies, be allowed transition ?

This aint a choice like bleaching your hair, getting an ear ring or deciding to become a goth. :rolleyes:

suicide_circus

jmayo wrote: »

The transgender debate seems to be getting quite nasty.

We have to ask why that is.

Is it because people like Germaine Greer and Graham Linehan are conservative bigots?

Or is it because people who have to be diagnosed by psychiatrists and go through extensive therapy are the ones who are defining what objective truth is?

AndrewJRenko

Gravelly wrote: »

Jaysus your poor back will be broken from moving those goalposts.

Try harder. Here's the question I asked ;


...
What celebrities/left leaning media people where wheeled out on Prime Time specifically to give their wholly inexpert views?

AndrewJRenko

tritium wrote: »

Who the hell gave you the right to tell anyone what the hierarchy in social issues should be?

If anything immigration is a far more immediate and life or death question for a greater number of people.

I didn't say anything about hierarchy. Dante said "I don't recall there being any objection to the numerous celebrities and left leaning media people being wheeled out to give their wholly inexpert views on abortion or homosexuality."

I'm just pointing out that no one has identified any celebrity speaker on Prime Time specifically on these issues, or any similarly sensitive issues.

AndrewJRenko

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I’ll cede one thing. The laws haven’t caused much issue here yet but we don’t seem to have the level of trans activism that the US or U.K. has.

It’s relatively easy to predict the outcome of cases though. Unless self id is unconstitutional then a trans woman is a legal woman. Ergo any discrimination against that legal woman in favour of a biological woman would be unlawful. This could include sports and existing most women spaces.

I can’t see any way around this unless justices overrule the law on some ground but that itself would be condemned as discriminatory, and I don’t think it will happen.

Equality law really isn't 'fairly easy "to predict. If it were easy, there wouldn't be teams of opposing lawyers fighting it out at the WRC each day.

Topgear on Dave

Gravelly wrote: »

You'd want to tell their Chief Executive that, she seems to take a different view:

"Removal of the sterilisation clause is key"


That is quite an amazing and horrifying statement.

Riskymove

jmayo wrote: »

Eh how many times was Liam Cunningham, an actor, on various current affair shows voicing his supposed expert opinion on immigration and migrants ?

Just on this, Liam Cunningham is an Ambassador for World Vision and has made numerous trips to area where there are refugees

https://www.worldvision.ie/campaigns/liam-cunningham-in-uganda

I think it's fair enough he be considered well up on the issues around refugees

Franz Von Peppercorn

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Not transitioning IS making a decision - a decision to spend those critical teenage years in a gender that is wrong for you.

Are they capable of making that decision?

Yes, its less harmful.

Gravelly

Riskymove wrote: »

Just on this, Liam Cunningham is an Ambassador for World Vision and has made numerous trips to area where there are refugees

https://www.worldvision.ie/campaigns/liam-cunningham-in-uganda

I think it's fair enough he be considered well up on the issues around refugees

Did he get that gig before or after his media appearances on the subject though?

Calhoun

jmayo wrote: »

Eh how many times was Liam Cunningham, an actor, on various current affair shows voicing his supposed expert opinion on immigration and migrants ?

From recollection he was on current affairs programs a couple of times.


The transgender debate seems to be getting quite nasty.
Watching documentary on British TV channel a while back, a debate being held had bouncers trying to keep one gang of loonies out and ended up with police being called.

And there seems to be real hatred amongst some trans people for anyone who isn't and you end up with the lunacy where some ones complain women from birth can't now speak for females. :rolleyes:

A few things that leap out for me from all the recent debates.
Children should not be transitioned, they are not capable of making that decision.
Former males should not be allowed compete in physical sports against born females.
We should not be creating a myriad of gender descriptions to suit everyone and anyone.

Adults can transition all they want.
Good luck to them.

Of course its getting nasty its only going to get nastier the more and more they target kids. I can understand why a minority group wants to grow its a matter of survival but there is a fine line with it coming across as predatory.

The photo session in Canada about a week ago with the naked adult beside the 10 year old "drag queen" is not going to endear allot of people to the cause. Before that we had the incident of the 11 year old in the gay bar.

I can only see things getting worse for the trans community the more and more children are involved.

Annasopra

seamus wrote: »

You think most women are anti-trans?

Given that over 1000 women in Ireland signed a letter telling terfs where to go I would doubt that anyway.

Franz Von Peppercorn

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Equality law really isn't 'fairly easy "to predict. If it were easy, there wouldn't be teams of opposing lawyers fighting it out at the WRC each day.

This one is pretty simple, Andrew. And totally unrelated to the WRC cases which are he says, she says,.

If a person is legally a woman then there is no distinction between another person classified as a woman. Clearly.

Annasopra

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Well I started the thread because I saw the article online regarding the Primetime debate.
I think we're having this debate because we need to find the right way to go forward for our country.
People are generally unsure of what the whole thing entails and how a young kid may decided they want to change gender.
What age can they start the process?
How will this matter be discussed in school?
When do you say yes/the doctor says yes to your kid changing gender?
What are the consequences?
We all knew guys who may have being a bit feminine or girls who were masculine grow up or may have being ourselves. Will it be sold to these people they may have gender issues in the future.

Have you read the review report?

http://www.teni.ie/page.aspx?contentid=1799

Gravelly

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Given that over 1000 women in Ireland signed a letter telling terfs where to go I would doubt that anyway.

So because 0.04% (approximately) of Irish women signed a petition, you can extrapolate how the majority feel?
Since 99.96% of women didn't sign it, what does that say?

Franz Von Peppercorn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Given that over 1000 women in Ireland signed a letter telling terfs where to go I would doubt that anyway.

I think you may be mistaken as to the size of the female population.

Annasopra

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Is Linehan anti-trans? That’s a genuine question, I don’t know an awful lot about his Twitter outbursts on the topic.

It’s just, if he is expressing reservations about things like pre-teens being given medication to block puberty or questioning whether young teenagers should undergo sex-change surgery, that doesn’t necessarily indicate that he is anti-trans, does it?

Has he gone farther than this, made openly anti-trans statements?

Yes


https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2018/oct/07/graham-linehan-police-warning-complaint-by-stephanie-hayden-transgender-activist-twitter

https://gcn.ie/father-ted-graham-linehan-trans-nazism/

https://gcn.ie/graham-linehan-encourages-cruel-campaign-national-lottery-block-trans-kids-charity-funding/

Annasopra

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I think you may be mistaken as to the size of the female population.

Nope. I am suggesting that many Irish women would agree with that stance and that terfs are a minority of Irish women.

Annasopra

pumpkin4life wrote: »

No it isn't. This is completely wrong.

A treatment that causes 40% to attempt suicide is a massive failure by any standard.

If Graham Linehan gets more people to realize how sinister this stuff is, then good for him.

You are saying that 40% of trans people attempt because of treatment. What evidence have you for that?

AndrewJRenko

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

"Removal of the sterilisation clause is key"


That is quite an amazing and horrifying statement.

I'm confused as to what this means in this context. Can anyone enlighten me please?

AndrewJRenko

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Yes, its less harmful.

Really? And your basis for that claim is?