seamus wrote: » You mean when it was all behind closed doors and priests fiddled with kids, women got battered, gay people feared for their lives and anyone who displayed any kind of "non-Christian" sentiment was ostracised by the media? Yeah, great craic that was. I'm wide open to discussion that things may have swung a little too wildly the other way, but calls to not include a comedy writer with a stated anti-trans bias on a discussion about trans issues, is not trying to silence anyone. We need experts to discuss social matters. Not outrage merchants and religious zealots. Bringing Graham Linehan on for this just goes to show that the "Prime Time" which was once RTE's best effort at a dignified current affairs programme, is going down the path of doing whatever is necessary to get the most viewers. It has no interest in honest journalism.
ironwalk wrote: » Does he have an "anti-trans bias"?
ironwalk wrote: » Most women's dressing rooms have cubicles. Short curtains, gaps under partitions, open topped. My point is, do you want your teenager undressing in a confined space with a bloke with a phone? Yes/no? Or, if that doesn't bother you; what about when she is out and a bloke is harassing her in the pub. She goes to the bathroom to get away from him.....ooops, now John is Jane and security can't say anything.
VeryTerry wrote: » Spends all his time arguing with no marks on Twitter to the point where the cops are getting involved. That's some seriously sad behavior.
seamus wrote: » Yes. He is unwilling to entertain any discussion on it unless it meets with his opinion, or even show respect to anyone else in such a discussion. He's probably gone off the rails tbh. In a discussion where he insists that trans is a mental illness, Linehan probably needs psychiatric help of his own. It's an obsession for him at this stage.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » You seem to be trying very hard to make up scenarios just so you can oppose them. There is a word for that.
ironwalk wrote: » Do I? Making up scenarios? Quick Google search....https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/peeping-tom-pervert-secretly-filmed-7897266 More where that came from. In any case, let's not get diverted down side alleys. Graham Linehan seems to be one of the few men who is prepared to see how trans rights can be manipulated by abusive men.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » I would say he probably represents the majority female position, but maybe not the position of all woke males. In any case he, as far as I remember, got into this when some transwoman in Canada started to demand that asian beauty parlours wax her balls. Graham thought that that was a bit much. I agree that he's a bit aggressive on twitter, its surprising to see someone so doctrinaire left take this stance, he is to be applauded for actually having some thoughts outside his group think.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » So you applaud him for having thoughts that match your own? and you complain about group think.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » No. I applaud him for dissenting from group think. Here is how I would phrase what you think I said. "I applaud him for having thoughts that match my own". But I didn't say that, did I? Enough straw man tactics. As for my beliefs, they are strongly economically leftist but this nonsense is just the epitome of capitalist ideology, the belief that people can be what they want to be by just saying they are.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » So his beliefs DO match yours then.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » that was a man in unisex changing rooms. How is that relevant?
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Yes his beliefs match mine on this particular topic ( in as much as I know his beliefs) but so what? Why don't you argue on the substantive points rather than your typical playing the man.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » What are the substantive points? they seem to boil down to "wont somebody please think of the children". You seem to think he is brave but in reality he has just decided to be a **** to a small group of people and you think that is wonderful.
ironwalk wrote: » It's relevant because when we discuss trans rights, most of us think in terms of kindness. How awful it must be to feel that you were born in the wrong body; how difficult it must be to hide that part of yourself every day, to never feel that you fit in. Our compassion is activated. When our compassion is activated, we have to be very careful that manipulative people don't use it to meet their ends. That why you see the bully who is called out, dissolve into tears and attempt to divert from their behaviour by playing the victim card. In this instance, trans rights activate our compassion. Fair enough, as it should be. But there is a small subset of men, who will manipulate the situation to predate on women. E.G. peeping tom cameras under changing room curtains. That's why my example is relevant. There are peeping toms, "women of the year" who work in finance and wear a suit-and-tie for half the week, and fishnets the other half. There are "women" who want beauticians to wax their ballsacks and take legal action when beauticians refuse on the grounds that they're not qualified, closing the beautician's business. There are men who hate women, pure and simple. That's why it's relevant. As far as I can see, that's what Linehan is on about.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » You might want to read what plenty of women think about self identification, for example in mumsnet. There are plenty of issues where biological women feel threatened. As for the children, we should most definitely protect children from life changing surgery or hormones that could affect their later development.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » There will always be perverts who exploit any situation.
ironwalk wrote: » You are completely correct....so , I imagine, you support women's concerns that their rights to privacy are not reduced to accommodate trans rights.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » their rights to privacy are not being reduced.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » I would say he probably represents the majority female position, but maybe not the position of all woke males.
seamus wrote: » You mean when it was all behind closed doors and priests fiddled with kids, women got battered, gay people feared for their lives and anyone who displayed any kind of "non-Christian" sentiment was ostracised by the media? .
seamus wrote: » You think most women are anti-trans?
