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

Manholes are gender neutral now

Options
1…5681011…13

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,065 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    Hunky Monster wrote: »
    Who said anything about the US?

    This is Canada. If you've any interest take your time to watch the video or google it yourself. It's not a conspiracy theory, legislation has passed in Canada, you can lose your job and go to prison for using "wrong speech".

    Google.

    Ah I see where you're going wrong. The manholes issue is taking place in the US, not Canada.

    The argument has been made repeatedly that the state is Compelling people to use the new terms and will sanction people who don't do it. I think we've established that Canada won't be enforcing this in the US. This manholes story is a bit of a non issue, isn't it?


  • Options
    #213
    slipperyox
    Registered Users Posts: 594 ✭✭✭slipperyox


    Ok I'll answer my own question...

    A manhole is round, so that it cannot fall into the hole it covers...


  • Options
    #214
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    Woodsie1 wrote: »
    Whats funny is you believing a man can have a baby.
    Its biologically impossible.

    Men have been popping out babies since about 11 years now, biologically possible.
    Hunky Monster wrote: »
    I'm sorry to break this to you but that's a woman. Just because a woman takes massive doses of hormones it doesn't make her a man. She can feel like one, people can call her a man but it's not a man.

    If I ate hay and lived in a stable from now on I wouldn't be a horse in 10 years.

    You'd be a donkey?


  • Options
    #215
    MEGA BRO WOLF 5000
    Registered Users Posts: 17,438 ✭✭✭✭MEGA BRO WOLF 5000


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Ah I see where you're going wrong. The manholes issue is taking place in the US, not Canada.

    The argument has been made repeatedly that the state is Compelling people to use the new terms and will sanction people who don't do it. I think we've established that Canada won't be enforcing this in the US. This manholes story is a bit of a non issue, isn't it?

    I agree totally. It's a non issue because nobody is being compelled to use this speech...so far. Precedent is there though in Canada showing things like this could be made into law. That's where the references to 1984 come in. This story is just clickbait as far as I can see BUT it is in Berkley...one search of that place will make your head spin.


  • Options
    #216
    Woodsie1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Woodsie1


    slipperyox wrote: »
    Ok I'll answer my own question...

    A manhole is round, so that it cannot fall into the hole it covers...

    My old man always has these random nuggets of info,i must tell him not to call them manholes anymore though.
    Id say he'll laugh in my face in fairness:D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    Rodin wrote: »
    That is not a man.
    Men do not have uterii.
    That person has a uterus and is therefore not a man.

    I can not make it any more clear.

    So according to you a woman is not a woman unless they have an uterus? Hope you told all the women who have no uterii that they are not women based on your conclusions.


  • Options
    #218
    Woodsie1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Woodsie1


    klaaaz wrote: »
    Men have been popping out babies since about 11 years now, biologically possible.

    They are not men having these babies.


  • Options
    #219
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    Hunky Monster wrote: »
    Yeah its all well and good until you call some woman who identifies as a man the wrong pronoun and you find yourself with no job or in prison. Google this for yourself and see what's happening in Canada.

    New to me.. But from what I've googled this is inaccurate. Do you have links you could share of someone going to prison. Thanks man


  • Options
    #220
    slipperyox
    Registered Users Posts: 594 ✭✭✭slipperyox


    klaaaz wrote: »
    Men have been popping out babies since about 11 years now, biologically possible.



    You'd be a donkey?

    just 11 years have passed and 500 million years of evolution has been revolved. What an amazing time we live in.


  • Options
    #221
    Rodin
    Registered Users Posts: 3,130 ✭✭✭Rodin


    klaaaz wrote: »
    So according to you a woman is not a woman unless they have an uterus? Hope you told all the women who have no uterii that they are not women based on your conclusions.

    I said men do not have uterii.
    I made no comment on what women do or do not have.

    I really did make that quite clear.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    Woodsie1 wrote: »
    They are not men having these babies.

    Yes they are, have you not read the news that men have given birth and have been raising their natal children?


  • Options
    #223
    Shemale
    Registered Users Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭Shemale


    klaaaz wrote: »
    Poor you stuck in the era of yesteryear, has the wonders of the modern world like electricity reached you yet?

    They clearly have, you are replying to the poster on the friggin internet


  • Options
    #224
    Woodsie1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Woodsie1


    klaaaz wrote: »
    Yes they are, have you not read the news that men have given birth and have been raising their natal children?

    They are not men,how you cant grasp this very simple concept is hilarious


  • Options
    #225
    slipperyox
    Registered Users Posts: 594 ✭✭✭slipperyox


    its trolling peeps.

    leave it alone


  • Options
    #226
    slipperyox
    Registered Users Posts: 594 ✭✭✭slipperyox


    it


  • Options
    #227
    Rodin
    Registered Users Posts: 3,130 ✭✭✭Rodin


    Woodsie1 wrote: »
    They are not men,how you cant grasp this very simple concept is hilarious

    I doubt they did well in biology in school.
    Their reading comprehension is exceedingly poor also.


  • Options
    #228
    Shemale
    Registered Users Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭Shemale


    So snowflakes in California get offended by gender words no matter what they ****ing refer to.

    Man hole is now maintainence hole.

    Looking forward to what they concoct for female, human, she and they.


  • Options
    #229
    Woodsie1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Woodsie1


    Rodin wrote: »
    I doubt they did well in biology in school.
    Their reading comprehension is exceedingly poor also.

    They are from the school of "so what your saying is"
    Peterson.jpg


  • Options
    #230
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    Woodsie1 wrote: »
    They are not men,how you cant grasp this very simple concept is hilarious

    It's quite simple and quite ludicrous that you don't understand. They are masculine people who have bravely took on the role of giving birth.


  • Options
    #231
    Woodsie1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Woodsie1


    klaaaz wrote: »
    It's quite simple and quite ludicrous that you don't understand. They are masculine people who have bravely took on the role of giving birth.

    Oh I see youve dropped calling them men to now masculine people.
    Good progress.
    Not men having babies,masculine women.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,065 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    Hunky Monster wrote: »
    I agree totally. It's a non issue because nobody is being compelled to use this speech...so far. Precedent is there though in Canada showing things like this could be made into law. That's where the references to 1984 come in. This story is just clickbait as far as I can see BUT it is in Berkley...one search of that place will make your head spin.

    Deal with the state compelling people to say things when they actually happen. Picking worst case scenarios from around the world and pretending they're ubiquitous, is really silly.

    That's what this thread has been about all along. Imagining victim hood and sharing the delusion among the group


  • Options
    #233
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    Woodsie1 wrote: »
    Oh I see youve dropped calling them men to now masculine people.
    Good progress.
    Not men having babies,masculine women.

    It was an attribute of masculinity to describe those men who give birth.


  • Options
    #234
    Calhoun
    Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    Woodsie1 wrote: »
    Oh I see youve dropped calling them men to now masculine people.
    Good progress.
    Not men having babies,masculine women.

    This is closer to being correct, masculine women. Biologically they are female because they have reproductive organs.

    I suppose it is brave considering the stigma that comes with having an outward male shell but making the decision to get pregnant.

    If they were really male though they would opt out from giving birth as its not something we can naturally do.


  • Options
    #235
    Woodsie1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Woodsie1


    klaaaz wrote: »
    It was an attribute of masculinity to describe those men who give birth.

    No it was a feeble attempt to backtrack from your hilarious idea that men can have babies.
    Men cant have babies,women can,trans men can but actual real biological men cant.


  • Options
    #236
    SEPT 23 1989
    Registered Users Posts: 43,028 ✭✭✭✭SEPT 23 1989


    The devil makes work for idle hands


  • Options
    #237
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    Woodsie1 wrote: »
    No it was a feeble attempt to backtrack from your hilarious idea that men can have babies.
    Men cant have babies,women can,trans men can but actual real biological men cant.

    Nope, you've been backtracking yourself from insulting men with language like that they cannot give birth which itself not exclusive to women.


  • Options
    #238
    Woodsie1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Woodsie1


    klaaaz wrote: »
    Nope, you've been backtracking yourself from insulting men with language like that they cannot give birth which itself not exclusive to women.

    This is an insane post.
    ive not backtracked one bit.

    Men cant have babies,ive said this from the start and still saying it now.


  • Options
    #239
    Franz Von Peppercorn II
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn II


    klaaaz wrote: »
    Yes they are, have you not read the news that men have given birth and have been raising their natal children?

    Biological women them would be.


  • Options
    #240
    Franz Von Peppercorn II
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn II


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Deal with the state compelling people to say things when they actually happen. Picking worst case scenarios from around the world and pretending they're ubiquitous, is really silly.

    That's what this thread has been about all along. Imagining victim hood and sharing the delusion among the group

    Canada is quite mad though.

    https://twitter.com/hjjoyceecon/status/1152106709562925056?s=21


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 3,637 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Woodsie1 wrote: »
    This is an insane post.
    ive not backtracked one bit.

    Men cant have babies,ive said this from the start and still saying it now.

    A donkey with a party hat on its head will never be a unicorn, even if some kinds of people think it can be.

    A man, complete, intact, whole, doesn't have the reproductive organs to bear a child. If a person can in fact conceive/carry/give birth to a child, they are not a man, not in the biological sense of the word which as far as I'm concerned is the only one that matters in this particular line of discussion.

    Dress whatever way you like. Call yourself what you like. But don't try to argue that the common and accurate linguistic terminology as it refers to human biology is adaptable and flexible in the way some fools would like it to be.

    We all know that when it comes to human reproduction, only women have babies and men simply can't. There are no exceptions to this clear-cut biological fact. None.

    Thankfully, there are very few people who are stupid enough to think that men can carry children.


Advertisement