nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Hungary Scrap Gender Studies Indoctrination Courses

DickSwiveller Returns

Great news coming out of Hungary. Victor Orban's government have stopped universities offering courses in Gender Studies. It's about time these courses were exposed for the unscientific propaganda vehicles they are.

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/orban-bans-gender-studies-courses-in-hungary-report-says-1.6365826

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

Merrick Jealous Monogamy wrote: »

Why does she have to explain herself?

Because this is an Internet discussion forum?

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

What exactly is it then? You're not bothered of someone is attracted to you. Is the presence of a penis?

In a women's shower area ? You're damn right it is. There are women who would not get undressed in front of a man, not just for cultural reasons. I'd say the only man to see my late auntie naked was the undertaker.

The point is it's lazy stereotyping and deflection to assume that people have an issue with sexual interest. It's not that, it's the fact that even if one person claims female identity with a nefarious purpose, it is too many.

That has already happened and it has to stop. You wouldn't (or should't) put a trans women post surgery into a man's prison so why put an anatomically male person in a space for women ?

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

Because this is an Internet discussion forum?

Yes, and the pattern goes - disbelieve, discredit, deflect - when there's a point made someone disagrees with.

Malayalam

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What exactly is it then? You're not bothered of someone is attracted to you. Is the presence of a penis?

Yes. It's the penis. Whatya gonna do about me?

7aubzxk43m2sni

Deleted User wrote: »

Because this is an Internet discussion forum?

Are we allowed to go down the road of asking trans women why they feel the need to dress in the woman's bathroom?

Why does it matter the specifically what it is about the presence of a naked male while she's showering? Whether it's his penis or she's shy or whatever the reason might be, it's still a valid point and she's most likely with the majority of women in this feeling.

[Deleted User]

Jesus you guys are wound up about this. I was genuinely curious what draws the line for you.

PlaneSpeeking

Malayalam wrote: »

Yes. It's the penis. Whatya gonna do about me?

Why must we have to defend not wanting to get undressed in a female only space with someone with a penis ?

A person with a penis is a man. End of discussion!!

The feelz do not trump billions of years of science!

Malayalam

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

. I'd say the only man to see my late auntie naked was the undertaker.

quote]
genuine laugh out loud moment poor auntie

PlaneSpeeking

Malayalam wrote: »

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

. I'd say the only man to see my late auntie naked was the undertaker.

quote]
genuine laugh out loud moment poor auntie

Ah sure down in West Cork, poor Liz Ann never got much in the way of action! When you're classed as the spinster sister, I don't think that's a big seller on Tinder !!!!!

Franz Von Peppercorn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I think its a Catholic prudish thing. Go to other countries and people have no problem at all being naked in swimmming pool changing rooms.

Plenty of nudity here in Irish changing rooms, particularly swimming rooms. Generally 50s plus hairy lads letting it all hang out.

The general debate on nudity here shows how little reading the modern average leftist does.

Malayalam

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Jesus you guys are wound up about this. I was genuinely curious what draws the line for you.

I'm not wound up about it, am in a good mood today, and the penis is nice so don't worry. Just not Mary's micky at touching distance when I am wrestling with me swim suit. Roh Kay?

[Deleted User]

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Why must we have to defend not wanting to get undressed in a female only space with someone with a penis ?

A person with a penis is a man. End of discussion!!

The feelz do not trump billions of years of science!

End of discussion? Well thats that then.

Referring to billions of years of science when in reality it's been thousands of years at most since we've started segregating ourselves by gender.

It's ironic that your own argument can easily be used against you. It's your feelings of seeing a penis that is trumping this situation.

If we all grew up using unisex toilets, nobody would give a damn either way.

7aubzxk43m2sni

Deleted User wrote: »

If we all grew up using unisex toilets, nobody would give a damn either way.

IF. But we didn't.

What's your argument here?

PlaneSpeeking

Malayalam wrote: »

I'm not wound up about it, am in a good mood today, and the penis is nice so don't worry. Just not Mary's micky at touching distance when I am wrestling with me swim suit. Roh Kay?

And back at ya with the lolz M!!!!

My locker in my gym is on the bottom shelf, I really don't want to see someone's lad at eye level when I'm putting my knickers on - unless I've got lucky the night before!

Franz Von Peppercorn

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What exactly is it then? You're not bothered of someone is attracted to you. Is the presence of a penis?

It’s the presence (and absence) of a penis that presumably is the reason for the segregation on the first place. Biological women don’t like being around biological men when naked. In general anyway.

As I said before there’s a push to more segregation (Muslim women only swimming times, safe spaces) and there’s this.

In the echo chambers of the student and academic left the trans debate is settled, in the real world it isn’t. In fact this is one example of a supposed liberty that will impinge on other liberties. Quite severely in fact.

Gay marriage didn’t. Decriminalising homosexuality didn’t.

However accepting biological males as females affects biological females in changing rooms, female only events and safe spaces, in intimate situations with the doctors, a police pat down, prisons and much more. It can even affect the chances of their children getting on sports team.

[Deleted User]

Merrick Jealous Monogamy wrote: »

IF. But we didn't.

What's your argument here?

Someone argued billions of years of science when the reality is that we've naturally mixed for a long, long time. This is cultural change. It's not science.

Franz Von Peppercorn

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Someone argued billions of years of science when the reality is that we've naturally mixed for a long, long time. This is cultural change. It's not science.

What does “naturally mixed” mean in that case?

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

Someone argued billions of years of science when the reality is that we've naturally mixed clothed, and with permission/preference if not for a long, long time. This is cultural change. It's not science.

Fixed you there.

[Deleted User]

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

What does “naturally mixed” mean in that case?

Looking at it from an anthropological point of view. The origin of our species is egalitarian. I'm arguing against the idea that "this is science". This is a learned behaviour. I'm not saying it's right or wrong either way.

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

Someone argued billions of years of science when the reality is that we've naturally mixed for a long, long time. This is cultural change. It's not science.

Nice deflection but you'll be well aware that my comment on billions of years of science referred to men having penises and women having vaginas.

Nothing more.

Rory28

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Why must we have to defend not wanting to get undressed in a female only space with someone with a penis ?

A person with a penis is a man. End of discussion!!

The feelz do not trump billions of years of science!

If a trans person was post-op you wouldn't have an issue with them using the ladies changing room but if the same person was pre-op you would have an issue?

I don't think someone that looks like a chick should be in the the mens changing room regardless of having a penis or not but I can see it will make people uncomfortable. Honestly I don't know how to call it. Personally I have no issues sharing with trans men but I can appreciate its different for women.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

If we all grew up using unisex toilets, nobody would give a damn either way.

But we didn't, so the attitudes of those who are uncomfortable with sharing those spaces are important.

TBH My biggest issue isn't the physical but the psychological. How do we know that someone who has made the surgical physical switch has also made the emotional/personality/mental switch too? There are an awful lot of assumptions going on here.. and I'd prefer that this whole thing had a decade or two to become more established with extensive research committed before we run ahead changing our whole society/existence to accommodate them, without any real consideration of how our society will be affected....

There really is far too much "rose-tinted glasses" being applied to these kinds of changes, without any effort to consider the possible negatives (both short term and long term). Instead, there is the automatic assumption that everything will be better regardless of what happens, and anything negative that might occur is the fault of those who are uncomfortable or resist the enforced changes.

[Deleted User]

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Nice deflection but you'll be well aware that my comment on billions of years of science referred to men having penises and women having vaginas.

Nothing more.

How about argue the point rather referring to deflection nonsense

PlaneSpeeking

Rory28 wrote: »

If a trans person was post-op you wouldn't have an issue with them using the ladies changing room but if the same person was pre-op you would have an issue?.

Absolutely 100% spot on.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But we didn't, so the attitudes of those who are uncomfortable with sharing those spaces are important.

TBH My biggest issue isn't the physical but the psychological. How do we know that someone who has made the surgical physical switch has also made the emotional/personality/mental switch too? There are an awful lot of assumptions going on here.. and I'd prefer that this whole thing had a decade or two to become more established with extensive research committed before we run ahead changing our whole society/existence to accommodate them, without any real consideration of how our society will be affected....

There really is far too much "rose-tinted glasses" being applied to these kinds of changes, without any effort to consider the possible negatives (both short term and long term). Instead, there is the automatic assumption that everything will be better regardless of what happens, and anything negative that might occur is the fault of those who are uncomfortable or resist the enforced changes.

I completely agree.

Maybe we should get rid of the idea of segregating our children by gender. I went to a mixed primary school and then an all boys secondary school. Why? It's bizarre when you think about it. Especially when I travelled and it wasn't the norm for them. Segregating us for education doesn't make a lick of sense to me when we're allegedly trying to reach a more equal society. Far enough for sports when there is an empirical, measurable difference between the sexes. That daily mail article doesn't make any sense if you find the idea of an all girls school to be bonkers in the first place.

I really think the solution to this is reaching unisex spaces. It'll cause a bit of stress at the start but it will get rid of all this nonsense. Sure Drury Buildings in dublin already have this.

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

How about argue the point rather referring to deflection nonsense

Well that was you, but I have argued the point.

I will try one final time.

There are many women who want to only be in a female only space when vulnerable (ill, naked, whatever).

If you have a penis, you are male.

You have no business being in that female only space.

Sexual orientation is a red herring - a lesbian is still a woman. A post op transgender women is a woman.

The reverse also applies - if a man in the lav on Saturday objected and told me to leave, I would have left.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

I completely agree.

I'm wondering since you seem to be reaching points I didn't make.

Maybe we should get rid of the idea of segregating our children by gender.

Except I haven't known a single culture/nation that has done so.... and experienced the long-term effects of such a change. I've lived in Asia, and spent time in Eastern Europe, Russia, Africa, and visited S.America. The only times I have seen any sign of no nudity taboo is in extremely poor or tribal/primitive regions.

I have not seen anything to suggest taking a modern established society/culture, and changing it.... No. It doesn't make sense. As Adults, we choose for ourselves what we find comfortable/uncomfortable through experience... but forcing it on people, when the culture has previously been extremely different. No. I don't like that

I went to a mixed primary school and then an all boys secondary school. Why? It's bizarre when you think about it. Especially when I travelled and it wasn't the norm for them. Segregating us for education doesn't make a lick of sense to me when we're allegedly trying to reach a more equal society. Far enough for sports when there is an empirical, measurable difference between the sexes. That daily mail article doesn't make any sense if you find the idea of an all girls school to be bonkers in the first place.

Education, typically, doesn't make much sense anyway since we've picked the most inefficient manner of learning, and applied fixed structures of discipline to our children.

I really don't see the connection between education and segregating based on our gender. [Although there are actually valid reasons to separate males/females in terms of learning since they both learn in different manners]

I really think the solution to this is reaching unisex spaces. It'll cause a bit of stress at the start but it will get rid of all this nonsense. Sure Drury Buildings in dublin already have this.

I think the solution is that we have male only spaces, female only spaces, and "whatever" spaces. Those who choose to go to the "whatever" spaces can be as liberal and welcoming as they wish.

[Deleted User]

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Well that was you, but I have argued the point.

I will try one final time.

There are many women who want to only be in a female only space when vulnerable (ill, naked, whatever).

If you have a penis, you are male.

You have no business being in that female only space.

Sexual orientation is a red herring - a lesbian is still a woman. A post op transgender women is a woman.

The reverse also applies - if a man in the lav on Saturday objected and told me to leave, I would have left.

That's fair enough. Just don't claim its not about the feelz.

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

That's fair enough. Just don't claim its not about the feelz.

I'm not sure whether you're not getting it on purpose or not but whether one is anatomically male or female has been scientifically established for billions of years.

Feelings do not enter in to whether someone is male or female.

Feelings DO enter into it when you consider that one gender may not want the other gender in their space when vulnerable.

I really cannot dumb that down any further.

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

End of discussion? Well thats that then.

Referring to billions of years of science when in reality it's been thousands of years at most since we've started segregating ourselves by gender.

That's arguable PJ. In most hunter gatherer societies gender segregation after puberty is the commonest setup and that lifestyle is one that goes back many hundreds of thousands of years. Into historical times it's most certainly been the case, some to a degree that makes Saudi Arabia look easy going on the matter. It's a pretty recent thing, pretty much under a century, where men and women would work and hang out with other men and women who aren't related to them by blood or marriage. That's the outlier in the human story, not gender segregation.