Ridiculous Moderation on Current Affairs/IMHO

I'm sure you guys are already aware about this one. In the "Lady can't have her hairy balls waxed" thread, it has been stated that we are not allowed to call a biological male a "he".

Now regardless of what you think about self identification, in a forum with IMHO in it, being told that calling a biological male a "he" is incorrect falls well beyond the bounds of reasonable discourse and instead insists that every poster must use the preferred pronouns of the subject.

Misgendering is the word that has been used to quell conversation. What if when saying "he" we were referring to the persons biological sex? That wouldn't be incorrect.

Surely the right of the individual to live by their own pronoun, doesn't trump the right of others to reject/ignore his their request. Is this the only scenario where this occurs? If so, why do trans people have this right?

I would ask, if this is the standard, then surely you should be closing every Donald Trump thread which calls him orange or comments on his hair as that is definitely image/fat shaming.

I would like to know exactly what is acceptable when discussing a man/woman who thinks they are the opposite sex.

(p.s. this isn't an attack on the specific mod. I'm sure he is only following orders)

MrFresh

Gender is a protected status, fake tan isn't.

drunkmonkey

It's not misgendering it's correctly identifying.

Prove me wrong!

Sir Oxman

I have one question.

Are boards.ie enforcing the law of the land (ie, is it an offence to refer to people possessing male genitalia as male)

Goodshape

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's not misgendering it's correctly identifying.

Prove me wrong!

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363.php

https://au.reachout.com/articles/the-difference-between-gender-sex-and-sexuality

https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00376.2005

etc.

Boards.ie: Niamh

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm sure you guys are already aware about this one. In the "Lady can't have her hairy balls waxed" thread, it has been stated that we are not allowed to call a biological male a "he".

Now regardless of what you think about self identification, in a forum with IMHO in it, being told that calling a biological male a "he" is incorrect falls well beyond the bounds of reasonable discourse and instead insists that every poster must use the preferred pronouns of the subject.

Misgendering is the word that has been used to quell conversation. What if when saying "he" we were referring to the persons biological sex? That wouldn't be incorrect.

Surely the right of the individual to live by their own pronoun, doesn't trump the right of others to reject/ignore his their request. Is this the only scenario where this occurs? If so, why do trans people have this right?

I would ask, if this is the standard, then surely you should be closing every Donald Trump thread which calls him orange or comments on his hair as that is definitely image/fat shaming.

I would like to know exactly what is acceptable when discussing a man/woman who thinks they are the opposite sex.

(p.s. this isn't an attack on the specific mod. I'm sure he is only following orders)

The mod asked that users, when referring to Yaniv, use Yaniv's chosen pronouns. This is the correct and most respectful way to address or discuss a trans person - any trans person - by using the pronouns that reflect their own gender identity.

Boards ethos has always been to be as inclusive as possible. Part of our Terms of Use include that you will not treat others with disrespect or post anything harmful, inappropriate or otherwise objectionable. This is no different. While Yaniv is unlikely to read the thread, other trans people might.

The fact this person is of questionable character is secondary. This is the first thread as far as I know in the new Current Affairs forum discussing a transgender person and therefore the first time it's come up for discussion there. It would have been preferable to have the discussion based on a less controversial figure but your average, non-controversial transgender person is just living life not getting caught up in things that will make the news or be fodder for a Boards thread, so here we are.

You'll note I have made my post so far without referring to Yaniv as she or he, man or woman. the dunne, you were also able to change 'his request' to 'their request' in your OP, thanks.

You are not being forced to refer to Yaniv as a woman, you are simply being asked not to refer to her or any other transgender woman as a man/he/his. Equally not to refer to a transgender man as a woman/she/her. This goes for all discussions about transgender people - either gender neutral or the gender they identify as is the preferable thing to use when posting.

The Specialist

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

The mod asked that users, when referring to Yaniv, use Yaniv's chosen pronouns. This is the correct and most respectful way to address or discuss a trans person - any trans person - by using the pronouns that reflect their own gender identity.

That's the problem, THEY choose that they want to be addressed as a specific title - nobody else can ever be forced to do that. It's a dark road to start down when you begin attempting to police language and terms of phrase, people are free to say whatever they want in whatever phrasing. Respect is also earned, not given and he/she are descriptive terms used when talking about male or female in conversation. Boards is asking people to completely deny everything they believe to pander to what is an extremely small percentage of the population.

The fact this person is of questionable character is secondary. This is the first thread as far as I know in the new Current Affairs forum discussing a transgender person and therefore the first time it's come up for discussion there. It would have been preferable to have the discussion based on a less controversial figure but your average, non-controversial transgender person is just living life not getting caught up in things that will make the news or be fodder for a Boards thread, so here we are.

No it's not, refer to my first point above. You are demanding people to give a frankly disturbing character respect when addressing him....for what? Because he is a trans and has chosen to identify as a female? Sorry but that does not compute morally with me and many others.

Niamh, with respect, if I refer to a man, then I choose to apply a male pronoun. If I refer to a woman, then I use the female pronouns.

It’s not reasonable to require people to deny the truth as they see it merely to avoid offending others, especially so when it is clearly not intended to distress others, merely to express oneself as one believes to be truthful.

Are we not to be allowed express ourselves using valid language, to communicate as an individual what we personally hold to be true, correct and fair?

To ALL intents and purposes, Yaniv is biologicaly male. Why on earth would I say that black is white? It’s absolutely ridiculous.

Boards.ie: Niamh

The Specialist wrote: »

That's the problem, THEY choose that they want to be addressed as a specific title - nobody else can ever be forced to do that. It's a dark road to start down when you begin attempting to police language and terms of phrase, people are free to say whatever they want in whatever phrasing. Respect is also earned, not given and he/she are descriptive terms used when talking about male or female in conversation. Boards is asking people to completely deny everything they believe to pander to what is an extremely small percentage of the population.

The mod made a reasonable request for people to use the widely accepted language when posting about a trans person. If you don't wish to follow that advice you can either ignore the mod instruction and accept the consequences or you can not post.

The Specialist wrote: »

No it's not, refer to my first point above. You are demanding people to give a frankly disturbing character respect when addressing him....for what? Because he is a trans and has chosen to identify as a female? Sorry but that does not compute morally with me and many others.

It's not about one character, it is about all trans people and the basic level of respect we should have when posting about them. There is nothing stopping you or any other poster discussing the actions of this person.

Boards.ie: Niamh

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

The mod asked that users, when referring to Yaniv, use Yaniv's chosen pronouns. This is the correct and most respectful way to address or discuss a trans person - any trans person - by using the pronouns that reflect their own gender identity.

Boards ethos has always been to be as inclusive as possible. Part of our Terms of Use include that you will not treat others with disrespect or post anything harmful, inappropriate or otherwise objectionable. This is no different. While Yaniv is unlikely to read the thread, other trans people might.

The fact this person is of questionable character is secondary. This is the first thread as far as I know in the new Current Affairs forum discussing a transgender person and therefore the first time it's come up for discussion there. It would have been preferable to have the discussion based on a less controversial figure but your average, non-controversial transgender person is just living life not getting caught up in things that will make the news or be fodder for a Boards thread, so here we are.

You'll note I have made my post so far without referring to Yaniv as she or he, man or woman. the dunne, you were also able to change 'his request' to 'their request' in your OP, thanks.

You are not being forced to refer to Yaniv as a woman, you are simply being asked not to refer to her or any other transgender woman as a man/he/his. Equally not to refer to a transgender man as a woman/she/her. This goes for all discussions about transgender people - either gender neutral or the gender they identify as is the preferable thing to use when posting.

I get that Niamh and thank you for your response.

There is a difference between being asked and being forced. In this case, I believe that we were told that we would not be allowed post if we decided that "he" was the correct pronoun. If this is merely a request, then are we free to decline?

What would be the boards.ie position if I told people that my preferred pronouns were xi/xir. Would boards.ie admonish any posters that referred to me by he/him? Or is this a specific ruling that only applies to trans people?

You mention the terms of use saying that you will not treat others with disrespect or post anything harmful, inappropriate or otherwise objectionable.

It is absurd that you could claim that calling a biological man "he" is either harmful, disrespectful, inappropriate or objectionable.

Boards.ie: Niamh

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

The mod made a reasonable request for people to use the widely accepted language when posting about a trans person. If you don't wish to follow that advice you can either ignore the mod instruction and accept the consequences or you can not post.

It's not about one character, it is about all trans people and the basic level of respect we should have when posting about them. There is nothing stopping you or any other poster discussing the actions of this person.

Niamh, it’s NOT widely accepted and that’s the point.

Boards.ie: Niamh

JayZeus wrote: »

Niamh, with respect, if I refer to a man, then I choose to apply a male pronoun. If I refer to a woman, then I use the female pronouns.

It’s not reasonable to require people to deny the truth as they see it merely to avoid offending others, especially so when it is clearly not intended to distress others, merely to express oneself as one believes to be truthful.

Are we not to be allowed express ourselves using valid language, to communicate as an individual what we personally hold to be true, correct and fair?

To ALL intents and purposes, Yaniv is biologicaly male. Why on earth would I say that black is white? It’s absolutely ridiculous.

You can still express yourself while referring to a person by their name or by 'they' can't you? The pronouns used may not be intended to distress but that doesn't mean that any other trans woman reading the thread would not be distressed or upset to see consist references to 'him'.

This is not about only this particular thread but all language used in reference to transgender people.

Boards.ie: Niamh

Deleted User wrote: »

I get that Niamh and thank you for your response.

There is a difference between being asked and being forced. In this case, I believe that we were told that we would not be allowed post if we decided that "he" was the correct pronoun. If this is merely a request, then are we free to decline?

What would be the boards.ie position if I told people that my preferred pronouns were xi/xir. Would boards.ie admonish any posters that referred to me by he/him? Or is this a specific ruling that only applies to trans people?

You mention the terms of use saying that you will not treat others with disrespect or post anything harmful, inappropriate or otherwise objectionable.

It is absurd that you could claim that calling a biological man "he" is either harmful, disrespectful, inappropriate or objectionable.

If you ignore a mod instruction, the same thing will happen that would happen in any other thread I'd imagine.

You are not being forced to use pronouns that you are not comfortable with (the irony here should not be lost on you or anyone else) but ARE being asked not to use what you have been told are the incorrect pronouns for this person. Refer to them/they if 'she' is beyond your reach.

Boards.ie: Niamh

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

You are not being forced to use pronouns that you are not comfortable with (the irony here should not be lost on you or anyone else) but ARE being asked not to use what you have been told are the incorrect pronouns for this person. Refer to them/they if 'she' is beyond your reach.

There is no irony there.

It would be ironic if we were trying to call him a unicorn because that was our preferred pronoun for him.

We aren't using preferred pronouns. We are using accurate pronouns. Nothing ironic about that.

I, and others, have been asked not to use the correct pronouns. It's not about being comfortable or about anything being beyond my reach. It's about being restricted from using the right words because of some bizarre policy.

Boards.ie: Niamh

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

If you ignore a mod instruction, the same thing will happen that would happen in any other thread I'd imagine.

You are not being forced to use pronouns that you are not comfortable with (the irony here should not be lost on you or anyone else) but ARE being asked not to use what you have been told are the incorrect pronouns for this person. Refer to them/they if 'she' is beyond your reach.

Who decides what is correct? Seriously, when did it become the case that I or anyone else shouldn't call someone 'he' instead of 'she', when we use all of the faculties at our disposal to determine whether we're engaging or referring to a male or a female of our species?

Policing language here on boards in a way that simply DOES NOT reflect what people will say in person (ignoring other online outlets) does nothing to reflect the true situation, setiment and meaning of people who contribute to any discussion here.

Anywhere there has been any form of conflict resolved the ability to openly express the truth as you experienced or witnessed it is essential. So when something of a topical and contentious nature comes up, where there will be some opposing views expressed, censoring the language one side or that divide can use to express themselves openly, HONESTLY, is entirely counterproductive.

While I understand that the intention here is to foster the development of constructive discussion, all that's going to happen is that a watered-down expression will be given, some will receive bans and some will just disengage entirely.

I'm not 'into' the whole identity politics stuff. This comes down to a question of whether or not people want to hear the 'voice of dissent' expressed in the language they poster genuinely holds to be accurate, or whether people are expected to toe the somewhat unreasonable line and use words that they would not use, removing the virility of the message the poster intends to deliver.

You might call it a shovel because you don't think the specifics matter, but if I see a spade, that's what I want to call it. I know what a spade is. I understand the difference. They both dig holes, are useful tools, have the same value when what you need to do is move some earth. But they are NOT the same.

And shrugging your shoulders and telling me it shouldn't matter, just call it a shovel because that's what everyone else calls it (erroneously) serves nobody in the end. I'm not ignorant, but I'm also not going to consent to using language which does not express with the specificity I intend.

That's not an intelligent position to adopt when entering into any discussion around what is of importance. I choose the words I use, not anyone else.

Varta

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

You can still express yourself while referring to a person by their name or by 'they' can't you? The pronouns used may not be intended to distress but that doesn't mean that any other trans woman reading the thread would not be distressed or upset to see consist references to 'him'.

This is not about only this particular thread but all language used in reference to transgender people.

People who believe they are Jesus (and it is quite common) can become distressed when others don't address them as Jesus. Most decent people don't like to see others distressed, but most people don't want to suspend reality either. As a basic rule in life I try my best to be kind to people, but I have no intention of denying reality and risk slipping into madness.

Glass fused light

Well while boards are looking into the correct use of words why is the word
**** < C u n t replaced by stars while the word "TERF" not?

Being female both are the female equivelant of ****** < n i g g e r but boards have continued to allow my posts the contain the word "TERF" but automatically star out the both of the others??

CIARAN_BOYLE

It's my opinion that transition is a process and not a decision.

The person in question has had a gag order placed (and since lifted) on reporting their identity as their transgender status was not known to people they trade with.

I doubt yaniv is transgender. Transgenderism is something real. Not an excuse for males to go into women's changing rooms and toilets or to force women to handle male genetalia.

Has Yaniv legally identified themselves as female or does yaniv still have identification papers as Jonathan? I know yaniv conducts business under the name Mr Jonathan Yaniv.

In Ireland the self declaration process for transgender persons is filling out a statutory declaration that you intend to live in your preferred gender for the rest of your life. Given that Yaniv still conducts business under the male name I struggle to belive the genuine transgender status of Yaniv.

In some of the legal case under discussion Yaniv self identified as Jonathan and approached women's beautician asking for genital waxing. He then pulled the transgender card after the fact (using he as Yaniv self identified as Jonathan in this case originally)

To me this reveals that Yaniv is mocking the existence of transgenderism and using its status to provide protections for Yaniv's own deviant behaviour.

In cases where the bona fide status of the transgender individual is under question the use of pronouns is in my opinion a statement of belief.

Personally I equate Yaniv to a less extreme version of Stephen Wood/Karen White. A male rapist who crafted a transgender identity (but did not legally change gender or engage with the medical profession) to be transferred into a female prison where they could rape women.

Boards.ie: Mark

Language evolves, as does society. Misgendering of one person not only affects that person, but other trans people too. The "accurate" pronoun is the preferred pronoun of the person; it's something that many of us don't have to deal with, but it's a small change in reference that can make a big difference.

There was an AMA with a transgender female back in 2015 where she said, "the key idea that the transgender community is trying to get across is 'your gender identity is *not* determined by what's between your legs.'"

One is welcome to be a "voice of dissent." However, there are Terms and Conditions that users agree to when signing up for an account as well as points in the FAQ and Charters that cover the various forums across the site. The virility of a message can be delivered just as potently by saying, "She/They/Yavin/This individual."

Discussing what you call a spade and a shovel and what pronoun you use when referring to a transgender person is also not the same. And we're not shrugging our shoulders and telling you it shouldn't matter; it should matter. Reading about the experiences and knock-on effects of misgendering can highlight why it should.

Boards.ie: Mark

Boards.ie: Mark wrote:

with a transgender female back in 2015 where she said, "the key idea that the transgender community is trying to get across is 'your gender identity is *not* determined by what's between your legs.'"

That's fine Mark, but I don't see why some nameless AMA participant from 4 years ago will convince me they are right because they say so. **** gender identity. I don't care about that. It's biological identity I am interested in.

drunkmonkey

Goodshape wrote: »

https://www.medicalnewst/232363.php

https://au.reachout.com/articles/th-between-gender-sex-and-sexuality

https://www.physiology.org/doi/fpplphysiol.00376.2005

etc.

Anyone can bang out links from the internet. I'll rephrase the question.

Why's should someone have to lie to themselves when they correctly identify something when they see it? That's what boards is demanding by force everyone does.

The posters in question all saw a man straight off, they did not have to think about it. It was a natural reaction, not one they learned in a book. This new leftist thinking is going completely against nature, if nearly all species could not tell the opposite sex we would have never made it this far.

The Specialist

Boards.ie: Mark wrote: »

Language evolves, as does society. Misgendering of one person not only affects that person, but other trans people too. The "accurate" pronoun is the preferred pronoun of the person; it's something that many of us don't have to deal with, but it's a small change in reference that can make a big difference.

There was an AMA with a transgender female back in 2015 where she said, "the key idea that the transgender community is trying to get across is 'your gender identity is *not* determined by what's between your legs.'"

One is welcome to be a "voice of dissent." However, there are Terms and Conditions that users agree to when signing up for an account as well as points in the FAQ and Charters that cover the various forums across the site. The virility of a message can be delivered just as potently by saying, "She/They/Yavin/This individual."

Discussing what you call a spade and a shovel and what pronoun you use when referring to a transgender person is also not the same. And we're not shrugging our shoulders and telling you it shouldn't matter; it should matter. Reading about the experiences and knock-on effects of misgendering can highlight why it should.

We are talking about less than or up to 1% of the population Mark - is boards really telling the other 99% of the country that they must supress biological facts and grammar and address this group by whatever they deem appropriate?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Goodshape wrote: »

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363.php

https://au.reachout.com/articles/the-difference-between-gender-sex-and-sexuality

https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00376.2005

etc.

You should take those arguments to the main thread. None hold up.

As for misgendering, it’s pretty easy enough to use the correct title.

In fact I often, in that thread, point out that what happens if we accept that a man is a legal woman.

splinter65

In short, I understood IMHO to be an ancronym for “in my honest opinion”.
I was wrong.
Apparently IMHO is fine as long as it’s IMHO that science and biological facts and what I can see with my two eyes must be ignored in favor of the demands of a tiny tiny % of humanity.
On the thread concerning a Canadian “person” suing a crowd of poor immigrant women any posts that don’t agree that the person is a woman are being deleted.
Thus there is only one opinion allowed, that of the people who agree that a person who is biologically a man can decide that they are actually a woman and demand to be treated as such irregardless of how unsafe that makes any biological female.
If there’s to be no discussion , then what’s the point in having the thread open?

jaxxx

Nice to see that it's Board's policy to subscribe to any left/right wing fanatic ideologies in place of solid logic and reason, and anyone that should dare question it are literally being told to keep their mouths shut! Pathetic!

dudara

Threads on same topic merged together.

dudara

Shield

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

You are not being forced to use pronouns that you are not comfortable with (the irony here should not be lost on you or anyone else) but ARE being asked not to use what you have been told are the incorrect pronouns for this person. Refer to them/they if 'she' is beyond your reach.

Niamh,

This is not true. Mike's words were clear: "Discuss the person's actions all you want, but from here on in, use the correct pronouns."

I urge you to look at the backlash that has been caused by this admin instruction to "use the correct pronouns" when so many of us deeply and vehemently believe to our core that we ARE using the correct pronouns, especially if these are professed as deeply-held religious beliefs which are protected under Article 44.2.1 of our Constitution.

Have you seen all of the dissenting voices on the other side of the debate that have been instantly wiped out with this directive to use newspeak... or else?

It is my opinion that you have cowtowed to the tyranny of the trans mafia, despite a huge number of people in disagreement, and I am appalled that none of you are willing to concede that you have chosen to take the side of only one perspective in this debate.

We've ALL lost here. You've lost valued perspectives due to this sudden "use the correct pronouns" instruction, I've lost the desire to want to contribute to a difficult debate because of this instruction and others who share my views now do so under implied threat of sanction.

I think the office needs to go back to the drawing board with this one, because as things currently stand, I won't be contributing any more to discussions on this site unless the radical left-wing bias stops, and I shall just stick to modding my forums and helping out new users as and when the need arises.

Thanks for reading.

Shield.

Shield

Separately, I recognise I am conflicted because I can see posts that have not been approved, so I shall not approve any posts on this thread or on this topic.

Shield.

drunkmonkey

Shield wrote: »

Separately, I recognise I am conflicted because I can see posts that have not been approved, so I shall not approve any posts on this thread or on this topic.

Shield.

How are you conflicted, you know exactly what your position is. Support people who support you as your 100% right.

Every post on this topic should be posted in this thread until sanity prevails.

Glass fused light

While the decision about the use of pronons was valid when decided 4 years ago.

It also needs to be looked at in the context of the arguments imposed on the non trans people today.

The litigant herself claims that by self IDing her genetic make up moves from XY to XX

A twitter account are actually baned for pointing out some medical differences

There is also a growing trend to suggest that the side effects of hormone treatments result in a trans woman getting a period.

The London Natural History Museum actually twittered that humans are not binary when it comes to sexual reproduction.

This creep is visable everywhere, along with calling women cis women, cervix havers, menstruators, people with vagian, pregnant people etc.

IMO it demonstrates that forced speech when it comes to gender ideology is a political statement.

If people who don't believe in gender ideology are force to use PC words in public life they can't express an objection by using their own words to express their belief.

The use of words including she/he are now very much political statement.

Glass fused light

Ps it became a political issue when misgendering became a hate crime.

And taking about biology became misgendering

So the idea of compelled speech is introduced and fixed in law.

People using "hate speech" risk being banned of social media or even a visit from the police.

First trans woman was used 
Then trans women are women. 
Then trans women and "cis" women are women.
And most recently trans women and non trans women are women.

I have no philological objection to calling someone "she", from my cultural perspective it can have the same context as "it" or "inanimate object". I have yet to meet a male car. Some people do, should they face a fine or prison fine for a belief in biological facts and an unwillingness to speak in a language which can not support their belief?

Sir Oxman

Of course, Orwell wrote about this top-down convoluted language approach to ensure censorship over 50 years ago.
This is nothing new - Trump administration banning references to climate change for example to stifle debate.

Positions of influence are loaded with willing proponents nodding their heads sagely as the obfuscation of truth becomes priority over objective fact and finally, all debate is snuffed out thanks to the forced (in)correct use of the new language.


As Orwell said himself:
“A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details.
When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer.”

Annasopra

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

The mod asked that users, when referring to Yaniv, use Yaniv's chosen pronouns. This is the correct and most respectful way to address or discuss a trans person - any trans person - by using the pronouns that reflect their own gender identity.

Boards ethos has always been to be as inclusive as possible. Part of our Terms of Use include that you will not treat others with disrespect or post anything harmful, inappropriate or otherwise objectionable. This is no different. While Yaniv is unlikely to read the thread, other trans people might.

The fact this person is of questionable character is secondary. This is the first thread as far as I know in the new Current Affairs forum discussing a transgender person and therefore the first time it's come up for discussion there. It would have been preferable to have the discussion based on a less controversial figure but your average, non-controversial transgender person is just living life not getting caught up in things that will make the news or be fodder for a Boards thread, so here we are.

You'll note I have made my post so far without referring to Yaniv as she or he, man or woman. the dunne, you were also able to change 'his request' to 'their request' in your OP, thanks.

You are not being forced to refer to Yaniv as a woman, you are simply being asked not to refer to her or any other transgender woman as a man/he/his. Equally not to refer to a transgender man as a woman/she/her. This goes for all discussions about transgender people - either gender neutral or the gender they identify as is the preferable thing to use when posting.

Could we also that trans people not be referred to as "it". That is quite disgustingly transphobic in my view.

klaaaz

Shield wrote: »

I urge you to look at the backlash that has been caused by this admin instruction to "use the correct pronouns" when so many of us deeply and vehemently believe to our core that we ARE using the correct pronouns, especially if these are professed as deeply-held religious beliefs which are protected under Article 44.2.1 of our Constitution.

Have you seen all of the dissenting voices on the other side of the debate that have been instantly wiped out with this directive to use newspeak... or else?

It is my opinion that you have cowtowed to the tyranny of the trans mafia, despite a huge number of people in disagreement, and I am appalled that none of you are willing to concede that you have chosen to take the side of only one perspective in this debate.

Backlash and dissenting voices are from a tiny minority of the usual suspects. The rest of the users/populace don't really care as they don't get offended on pronouns, it's not important to them.

There is no basis in the constitution or law for any religious held beliefs being breached by using correct pronouns for a person. There has not even being a test case on it in the Irish courts. However, the Gender Recognition Act is law as passed by our democratic institutions. Boards.ie is not a religious site exclusively for the religious faithful.

As for the "trans mafia" jibe, the same can be described for the right wing religious conservative mafia on this site who have posted deeply offensive posts bashing the transgender community since my short time here and before that. I have transgender friends, and I have deliberately still not informed them of this site yet as they deserve to be happy in their private lives and shielded away from the vitriol posted about the transgender community.

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote:

Could we also that trans people not be referred to as "it". That is quite disgustingly transphobic in my view.

klaaaz wrote:

Backlash and dissenting voices are from a tiny minority of the usual suspects. The rest of the users/populace don't really care as they don't get offended on pronouns, it's not important to them.

Well those two statements from two people on the opposite side seem to contradict each other.

"It" is a gender neutral term. Would the boards.ie mods be ok for that pronoun to be used?

this policy is enforced on the lgbtqia+ fora, that's valid imo.

its a hugely intrusive, heavyhanded and unnecessary decision to do so across any other boards.

a terrible decision, and it would be very good to see the admins take a look at this and decide to pull back.

The Specialist

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Could we also that trans people not be referred to as "it". That is quite disgustingly transphobic in my view.

We can’t refer to a male as he, and a lot of us are unwilling to refer to him as a she because it’s not correct.

They/them are group descriptors, not individual so both of them are out the window too.

All that’s left is It and I’m quite ok with that - would be interesting to hear boards opinion on it too. Language policing will always back you in to a corner.

klaaaz

klaaaz wrote:

As for the "trans mafia" jibe, the same can be described for the right wing religious conservative mafia on this site who have posted deeply offensive posts bashing the transgender community since my short time here and before that. I have transgender friends, and I have deliberately still not informed them of this site yet as they deserve to be happy in their private lives and shielded away from the vitriol posted about the transgender community.

If you think that, not going along with the pretence that men can be women (and vice versa) by simply thinking that they are, is vitriol, then that's on you.

I have no issue with trans people. I have issues when I am told I need to accept that they are what they are not.

Dial Hard

Deleted User wrote:

"It" is a gender neutral term. Would the boards.ie mods be ok for that pronoun to be used?

"It" is a deliberately provocative way to refer to a human being and you know it. "They" is a far more acceptable and grammatically correct way to refer to a person in a gender-neutral manner.

drunkmonkey

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Could we also that trans people not be referred to as "it". That is quite disgustingly transphobic in my view.

How about the other 99.6% of the world. All of them have mother's do you not think it's offensive and disgusting to claim your the exact same as them. Your not, pre op, post op trans are not women and never will be.
If your not a he and don't want to be you should be happy with IT for want of a better word but forcing the rest of us to play along is madness. It's only trans feelings that count. It's a selfish stance.
Woke social media is already backtracking as we can see from twitter, the more you push this the future away your getting. Stop for your own sakes.

MrFresh

Deleted User wrote: »

That's fine Mark, but I don't see why some nameless AMA participant from 4 years ago will convince me they are right because they say so. **** gender identity. I don't care about that. It's biological identity I am interested in.

You aren't being asked to change your beliefs, just treat trans people with respect. It's been explained to you that using the wrong pronouns affects trans people negatively. All you are being asked to do is use their preferred ones.

Shield wrote: »

Niamh,

This is not true. Mike's words were clear: "Discuss the person's actions all you want, but from here on in, use the correct pronouns."

I urge you to look at the backlash that has been caused by this admin instruction to "use the correct pronouns" when so many of us deeply and vehemently believe to our core that we ARE using the correct pronouns, especially if these are professed as deeply-held religious beliefs which are protected under Article 44.2.1 of our Constitution.

Have you seen all of the dissenting voices on the other side of the debate that have been instantly wiped out with this directive to use newspeak... or else?

It is my opinion that you have cowtowed to the tyranny of the trans mafia, despite a huge number of people in disagreement, and I am appalled that none of you are willing to concede that you have chosen to take the side of only one perspective in this debate.

We've ALL lost here. You've lost valued perspectives due to this sudden "use the correct pronouns" instruction, I've lost the desire to want to contribute to a difficult debate because of this instruction and others who share my views now do so under implied threat of sanction.

I think the office needs to go back to the drawing board with this one, because as things currently stand, I won't be contributing any more to discussions on this site unless the radical left-wing bias stops, and I shall just stick to modding my forums and helping out new users as and when the need arises.

Which religious belief are you referring to that prohibits the use of pronouns?


And since when does a vocal dissent dictate what is right from what is wrong? That's like a copper saying he won't enforce marijuana laws because it's so popular.

Deleted User wrote: »

Well those two statements from two people on the opposite side seem to contradict each other.

"It" is a gender neutral term. Would the boards.ie mods be ok for that pronoun to be used?

They're people, not things.

Buford T. Justice XIX

The Specialist wrote: »

We can’t refer to a male as he, and a lot of us are unwilling to refer to him as a she because it’s not correct.

They/them are group descriptors, not individual so both of them are out the window too.

All that’s left is It and I’m quite ok with that - would be interesting to hear boards opinion on it too. Language policing will always back you in to a corner.

'It' when used as a description of a person is dehumanising and that is never a good road to be travelling. I find myself being surprised that I even have to post that sentence.

Respect is a two way street, if you want to receive it, you also have to show it.

The Specialist

Buford T. Justice VI wrote: »

'It' when used as a description of a person is dehumanising and that is never a good road to be travelling. I find myself being surprised that I even have to post that sentence.

Respect is a two way street, if you want to receive it, you also have to show it.

Well we are out of descriptors at this point Buford, if everything is offensive then what can be used?

And I’d argue it’s highly disrespectful to 99.6% of the population to ask them to defer from normal descriptions of gender based on appearance.

Buford T. Justice XIX

The Specialist wrote: »

Well we are out of descriptors at this point Buford, if everything is offensive then what can be used?

And I’d argue it’s highly disrespectful to 99.6% of the population to ask them to defer from normal descriptions of gender based on appearance.

'They' can be used without detracting from your argument in an way. It's accurate and respectful and doesn't drag the conversation into a baser element that some seem intent on taking it?

And gender isn't binary, however much some want to see it in black and white. It's always been very much many different shades of grey.

riffmongous

Deleted User wrote: »

Well those two statements from two people on the opposite side seem to contradict each other.

"It" is a gender neutral term. Would the boards.ie mods be ok for that pronoun to be used?

The Specialist wrote: »

We can’t refer to a male as he, and a lot of us are unwilling to refer to him as a she because it’s not correct.

They/them are group descriptors, not individual so both of them are out the window too.

All that’s left is It and I’m quite ok with that - would be interesting to hear boards opinion on it too. Language policing will always back you in to a corner.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

How about the other 99.6% of the world. All of them have mother's do you not think it's offensive and disgusting to claim your the exact same as them. Your not, pre op, post op trans are not women and never will be.
If your not a he and don't want to be you should be happy with IT for want of a better word but forcing the rest of us to play along is madness. It's only trans feelings that count. It's a selfish stance.
Woke social media is already backtracking as we can see from twitter, the more you push this the future away your getting. Stop for your own sakes.

This is why I'm happy with the Boards policy, it's bad enough as it is with the constant threads without them also being full of dehumanising crap

drunkmonkey

riffmongous wrote: »

This is why I'm happy with the Boards policy, it's bad enough as it is with the constant threads without them also being full of dehumanising crap

Your a history mod, when has this happened before when the media has decided what can and can not be spoken? Was there a happy outcome?

Nobody is anti trans but trans equality ideology is in direct conflict with women and children's rights. Who's been dehumanised, looks like our mothers, daughters, wives etc from where i'm standing.

This is all relared to JY. Nobody besides a few woke can get their head around why people are getting banned for referring to her as a he. Twitter was at it and has pedaled back and unbanned people. Why can't boards follow suit.

drunkmonkey

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Could we also that trans people not be referred to as "it". That is quite disgustingly transphobic in my view.

Joey that's a fair request and I was wrong to say you should be happy to take the IT for want of a better word. I think the better word is Trans though, were all happy to accept trans people. Is it a possibility the Trans movement will ever be happy to just be Trans, JY has pushed this about as far as it can go, if she wins it will be a monumental day for Trans rights but also a very sad day for women and girls.
He or she will be better than IT anyday.

MrFresh

MrFresh wrote:

You aren't being asked to change your beliefs, just treat trans people with respect. It's been explained to you that using the wrong pronouns affects trans people negatively. All you are being asked to do is use their preferred ones.

I have been asked and I am saying no. I'm sorry that it affects trans people negatively but I do not think that calling a man a woman is respectful. It's a lie.

MrFresh wrote:

They're people, not things.

They are indeed. Specifically male and female people. Which is why I call biological men "he" and biological women "she".

Buford T. Justice VI wrote:

Respect is a two way street, if you want to receive it, you also have to show it.

I agree.

MrFresh

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Your a history mod, when has this happened before when the media has decided what can and can not be spoken? Was there a happy outcome?

The "n" word for black people and the "f" word for gay people. The "p" word for South East Asians is another one. Common enough really.

Deleted User wrote: »

I have been asked and I am saying no. I'm sorry that it affects trans people negatively but I do not think that calling a man a woman is respectful. It's a lie.

Perhaps you should try a website that doesn't require respect for diversity or a country that doesn't have gender as a protected status.

Deleted User wrote: »

They are indeed. Specifically male and female people. Which is why I call biological men "he" and biological women "she".

You've already been given alternatives that are gender neutral. For some reason these aren't good enough but "it" is. That really shows the lack of respect you have for transgender people.

MrFresh

MrFresh wrote: »

The "n" word for black people and the "f" word for gay people. The "p" word for South East Asians is another one. Common enough really.





Perhaps you should try a website that doesn't require respect for diversity or a country that doesn't have gender as a protected status.

none of your examples map over to instructing people to use what they believe to be the wrong pronouns for others against their wishes.

'gender as a protected status' is nonsense word salad in this context.

this is a topical issue, in no way agreed upon as resolved in our wider society and enforcement of it in this heavyhanded dictat approach is a total misstep from boards.

do you have to agree to enforce this approach to become/remain a mod of CA/IMHO?

MrFresh

MrFresh wrote:

Perhaps you should try a website that doesn't require respect for diversity or a country that doesn't have gender as a protected status.

I am referring to a person's biological sex. Not their gender.

MrFresh wrote:

You've already been given alternatives that are gender neutral. For some reason these aren't good enough but "it" is. That really shows the lack of respect you have for transgender people.

"It" isn't a word I would use. But it's just as accurate as calling a biological man "she". I do respect transgender people. I just disagree that someone who is born a man can ever be a woman or vice versa.