oLoonatic wrote: » That primetime was selective journalism at its finest. An absolute ****show from start to finish. Typical stuff from RTE really.
J_E wrote: » I was really quite disappointed at the inclusion of Graham Linehan as a 'credible' voice. It undermined the whole programme and brought the tone of the conversation on trans youth into the gutter and did serious damage to trans people seeking understanding. He can spout all he wants on Twitter, but to have that placed on television on a sensitive space like that, you couldn't help but feel like there were dubious motives.
dinnybyrne wrote: » Didn't see the show but I believe there is talk of legislation to allow under 18s get reassignment surgery without the parents consent.. Surely we can all agree that's madness?
Deleted User wrote: » It brought balance to be fair.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Balance from the perspective of a person who is constantly spending time directing hate towards trans people to be fair; Comparing trans campaigners to Nazis Campaigning to have a trans childrens charity defunded Verbally warned by police for harassment of a trans person Yeah "balance" from a hateful transphobic bigot
Ten of Swords wrote: » Pretty sure this was high up on the reason list, headline says it all really.
branie2 wrote: » Graham Linehan should stick to comedy writing
cloudatlas wrote: » Why is there no special term for men who are transphobic but 'terf' exists to describe women who are transphobic?
AllForIt wrote: » Well, there is no such thing as masculism as a movement but I don't think you'll have to wait too long considering the way things are going. Btw, I've noticed as a way of argument giving acronyms or names to opposing view points is an increasingly worrying trend across all issues. As if to legitimize the opposing argument. Worrying times. Tactic tactics.
jrmb wrote: » I agree that Linehan's views are appalling and that including him was an odd choice, but they have to feature a certain number of opposing opinions. They were probably hard pressed to find someone when they chose him.
cloudatlas wrote: » Yeah giving it an an acronym seems to be a way of disowning it? A refusal to say the 'feminist' part.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » It's more about naming and identifying the ideology behind the transphobic hatred coming from these people.
cloudatlas wrote: » But transphobia is not part of feminist ideology. It is singling out women, it's unhelpful.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Nope. Its singling out the ideology. Transphobia is part of the ideology of trans exclusionary radical feminism. Men can be terfs too. Nothing to do with singling out women at all. It is identifying the ideology. Feminism has many different ideologicsl strands by the way. As we have seen here in Irelsnd trans inclusive feminism is perfectly possible. Bit of a weird argument really. Women are not being singled out. Transphobes are.
“Are minors too young to make such a radical and life changing decision?” she asks. The “radical and life changing decision” referred to is a piece of paper that legally entitles someone to be acknowledged as the gender they live as. For trans people such a “radical and life changing decision” was made for them, without their consent when they were babies, but efforts to right the legal wrong that was done to trans people are being framed by Prime Time as “radical”.
cloudatlas wrote: » Come on now women are more likely to be feminists than men apart from those blokes who wear ‘this is what a feminist looks like’ T-shirt. It’s bizarre and unfortunately it does single out women as it features the word feminism especially and there is no term for male transphobes they are just transphobic and there are probably more transphobes who are male as the majority of violence against homosexuals is perpetuated by other men. I have no idea who originated the term that would be interesting but it is unfortunate use of words. There is no phrase such as ‘term’ trans exclusionary radical misogyny. Also within the trans community there is another unhelpful use of words ‘trans trender’ For someone who is deemed to be identifying or transitioning to get social brownie points. ðŸ˜
cloudatlas wrote: » Come on now women are more likely to be feminists than men apart from those blokes who wear ‘this is what a feminist looks like’ T-shirt.
cloudatlas wrote: » It’s bizarre and unfortunately it does single out women as it features the word feminism especially and there is no term for male transphobes they are just transphobic
cloudatlas wrote: » there are probably more transphobes who are male as the majority of violence against homosexuals is perpetuated by other men.
cloudatlas wrote: » There is no phrase such as ‘term’ trans exclusionary radical misogyny.
baby and crumble wrote: » Feminism isn't a 'womens only' movement. Plenty of men identify as feminists, even if they may refuse or don't actively to acknowledge that. If you believe in equality then you are feminist. The term 'feminism' is really a historic term coined many years ago when there was an enormous difference in how men and women were treated. In many ways that gulf has lessened to the point that 'feminism' seems, on the surface to be an outdated term. However, the philosophy and theories behind it are still relevant. Mainstream feminists tend to be equally as concerned about unequal treatments between the binary genders regardless of who is 'losing out' - which is why the idea of toxic masculinity is such a large concern. Men arguably loose out and are as negatively effected by toxic masculinity (and toxic femininity) as much as women. No, it's a way to differentiate the various exclusionary threads within the overarching feminist movement, of which there are many. Ideally, this would not be needed at all as the movement would not be disjointed like it is today. Intersectional feminism would be the way forward, but because humans are human, feminism as a political theory and ideology is fragmented. There are racist feminists, there are transphobic feminists, there are isolationist feminists all operating under the one banner, each thinking their type of feminism is the 'right' one. Also it's much quicker to type/say, and most people know what it means. ok, let's break all this down point by point. You seem very dismissive of male feminists. Why is that? My brothers are feminists, my Dad's a feminist, most of my male friends are feminists. They may not identify that as a key political ideology they ascribe to but they are. the label is not important for many people who agree with the core tenets of some branch of feminism. Again, feminism is not a womens only ideology. You also seem to be conflating transphobia and feminism. There are plenty of feminists who are not transphobic (most of the Irish feminist movement) and there are plenty of transphobes who are in no way feminist. if a male feminist is transphobic and that forms part of of his feminist ideology then he is likely a TERF, not because of his gender but because of exclusionary ideas about trans issues. However, within all of this we are ignoring the term 'radical'. radical feminism is another branch of feminist ideology so you can actual have a non radical trans-exclusionary feminist. it's just a lot less likely. Transphobia and homophobia are not the same thing. At all. People often equate gender minorities (eg trans* folks) and sexual minorities (lesbian, gay, bisexual folk) together however you can be trans and not gay. Obviously. If you're a trans woman attracted to men exclusively you're clearly not a lesbian. You can be transphobic but not homophobic and vice versa. Likewise, violence is not the only indicator of either transphobia or homophobia, nor is is exclusive to men. To think that is completely misleading and ignores verbal abuse, sexual abuse, financial abuse, bullying, discrimination and a host of other 'phobic' aggressions that have nothing to do with violence. Violence is simply the most obvious sign of trans or homophobia. Likely because misogyny isn't a social movement, or at least not one with enough history and/or influence to have evolved multiple completing threads drawn from the same initial source. However in what i do know about misogyny it's less likely that those who espouse misogyny are trans inclusionary. I may be wrong.
cloudatlas wrote: » My point is from the outside a lot of the terminology introduced is by essence divisive that’s the main idea of what I’m saying to keep it succinct and so as not to hugely digress.
baby and crumble wrote: » You seem to think this is a simple subject. It’s not. Anything relating to humans is naturally going to be complicated. You can’t reduce these concepts down to essentials and essentials only. It doesn’t work like that.
cloudatlas wrote: » Sorry I didn’t know there were rules but then again I’ve never heard a man referred to as a ‘terf’ either 🀷*♀️ I’ve been learning lots of new terms lately...
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/24615175400ae675a1f589d8e5bd3285.svg)
