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

Ridiculous Moderation on Current Affairs/IMHO

[Deleted User]

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)

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

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.

[Deleted User]

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?

[Deleted User]

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.

[Deleted User]

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.

[Deleted User]

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.

[Deleted User]

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.

[Deleted User]

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?

[Deleted User]

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.

Dial Hard

drunkmonkey wrote:

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.

On whose behalf are you speaking, exactly? I'm a (biological, as that seems very important to you) woman and I can categorically state that I do not and have never felt that my rights are being eroded or that I have been in any way dehumanised by acknowledging trans equality.

Unlike you, apparently, I can only speak for myself but literally - not once, ever - have I found myself in "direct conflict" with trans rights. Ever.

Annasopra

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.

For me I view "it" as a form of dehumanising and suggesting that trans people are not human and mere objects.

Annasopra

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.

Actually no. I think it disgusting to dehumanise trans people. I think it's disgusting that this is done in a deliberately disrespectful way. There's nithinh selfish about asking people not to be disrepectful or rude or deliberately dehumanise people.

Annasopra

Deleted User wrote: »

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

"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.

No - refusing to use a persons preferred pronouns is disrespectful so sorry no you really cant claim to respect trans people.

[Deleted User]

Joeytheparrot wrote:

No - refusing to use a persons preferred pronouns is disrespectful so sorry no you really cant claim to respect trans people.

Yes Joey. I can.

Pandering to people is disrespectful. I don't consider a trans woman to be the same as a woman. It's not disrespectful to act accordingly.

If I self identify as respectful, then would you accept it?

Zaph

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.

Given that much of this discussion is about a person that you're unlikely ever to meet, why are you taking such an entrenched view on it? How is it going to affect you personally if a person asks that they be referred to as her/she? It's going to have about as much impact on you as if I insisted that you from now on only refer to me as Bob. The only difference is that Bob is not part of my identity, so it really doesn't bother me if you do that or not. But identity is everything to a transgender person, so referring to them by something other than the pronoun that they have chosen for themselves and have asked people to use when referring to them does bother them. Your world isn't going to cave in if you accede to that request, however repeated denials of the request may ultimately cause theirs to collapse as they fight for acceptance. You don't even have to believe that it's the right word to use, but at the end of the day it's just a word that you've been asked to use, so why not use it?

derfderf

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

There is no scenario where using these terms are acceptable though. "It" is pretty disgusting too. He/She are not insults though. It's not a good comparison.

Earlier in the thread Niamh said we don't have to refer to Jennifer as a woman, just use the correct pronouns. So basically the statement "She is a man" is okay. Can you not see why people have an issue with that?

For what it's worth i have no issue using whatever pronouns people request. I have a problem with sites like Boards forcing the issue.

drunkmonkey

Dial Hard wrote: »

On whose behalf are you speaking, exactly? I'm a (biological, as that seems very important to you) woman and I can categorically state that I do not and have never felt that my rights are being eroded or that I have been in any way dehumanised by acknowledging trans equality.

Unlike you, apparently, I can only speak for myself but literally - not once, ever - have I found myself in "direct conflict" with trans rights. Ever.

Have you ever thought of getting into the ball waxing business? Have you a young daughter do you mind if I take her to a topless pool party, you don't need to come it's a safe space for young girls supervised by women with hairy balls.
Do you know what's going on here, I think you missed it

drunkmonkey

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Actually no. I think it disgusting to dehumanise trans people. I think it's disgusting that this is done in a deliberately disrespectful way. There's nithinh selfish about asking people not to be disrepectful or rude or deliberately dehumanise people.

Dehumanised is a strong word, calling a male a male is not dehumanising them. Trans women are being utterly selfish demanding absolute equal rights with women if they were born with a 3 piece suite.
It's easy wash your hands of JY, she's a pedo nothing to do with us. She's only enforcing the rights trans people fought for. I fully believe you want her to win this case against the women regardless of what you think of her personally.

Tikki Wang Wang

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.

Could these be considered?

Ze/Per/Hir/They – Pronouns used in the trans community instead of “he/she” or “him/her.” These pronouns offer inclusion and accuracy for someone who doesn’t identify by the male/female gender classifications. Note: Not all trans people use these pronouns; many use “he” or “she.”

[Hir: (here) A non-gender specific pronoun used instead of “her” and “him.”

Sie or Ze: (see or zee) A non-gender specific pronoun used instead of “she” and “he.”

Ve: (vee) A non-gender specific pronoun used instead of “she” and “he.”]

https://www.wou.edu/wp/safezone/pronouns/