J. K. Rowling is cancelled because she is a T.E.R.F [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

LLMMLL · 01-11-2020 7:42pm

Smacruairi wrote: »

It's enough that many many many people are leaving quotes and accounts under that Panti tweet. So if you're saying they are just a minority, fine, but then that means that we are dismissing every twitter opinion going forward, no #metoo etc

Nope you don't have to take one issue and decide you are going to dismiss all tweets/reports on it for all time. You can talk to people, do some research etc.

For example, in the metoo stuff, rather than just believe Twitter reports, I looked at experiences I had (observing the harrassment of women) and talked to women about what they had experienced. It unanimously confirmed what I read of the experiences of women on Twitter.

However in the case of lesbians being harrassed to sleep with transwomen literally ZERO of the many lesbians I know have experienced it, nor have the wider lesbian circles they themselves move in raised it as an issue.

Gruffalux · 01-11-2020 7:42pm

LLMMLL wrote: »

Ok I'll deal with a few (that you selectively picked, I challenge you to pick 5 randomly which I know you won't as we both know they'll be perfectly fine and not support your point at all)

This is abusive? It's not even disrespectful. It's a bit hyperbolic but I could post probably 100 posts from this boards thread that accuse TRAs of causing all manner of horrible things to young girls/ciswomen

Saying someone is a hypocrite is not abusive or harrassment.

This is pointing out the frankly strange argument TERFs make that focus solely on genitals. And yes, it is weird if the only thing you are attracted to in a person is their genitals.

I agree with you this one is disrespectful.

Yes disrespectful because of the language used.

So out of the non-random selectively picked selection there are maybe 2 bad ones?

Can I just point out that in the few days before I took my last break from this thread I was called a pathetic loser by one person, evil by another person, and a number of words that were starred out by another.

I have never called anyone evil or a pathetic loser. So there is no point in showing me that.

You ignore use of the word ''transphobic''. It is obviously a term of abuse. It is similar to homophobic. It means the other hates or is disgusted by the person. It is a very abusive term which for some reason is casually permitted on here, just like TERF, which is another slur.

It is not in the least bit weird to consider genitals as fundamentally important when it comes to the matter of SEXUAL attraction and relationship. Note also that gay men are not being targeted in the same manner and instructed that they are hypocrites, transmisandrist trash, violent, etc if they are not wanting to fcuk people with pussies.

Smacruairi · 01-11-2020 7:44pm

LLMMLL wrote: »

Nope you don't have to take one issue and decide you are going to dismiss all tweets/reports on it for all time. You can talk to people, do some research etc.

For example, in the metoo stuff, rather than just believe Twitter reports, I looked at experiences I had (observing the harrassment of women) and talked to women about what they had experienced. It unanimously confirmed what I read of the experiences of women on Twitter.

However in the case of lesbians being harrassed to sleep with transwomen literally ZERO of the many lesbians I know have experienced it, nor have the wider lesbian circles they themselves move in raised it as an issue.

So you asked people you knew, one issue they had, other they hadn't, thus you went with your own anecdotal opinion, grand.

Say no more, unless it's your own bubble and you are affected it is just hearsay

jam_mac_jam · 01-11-2020 7:47pm

It can be rare and not be nonsense at the same time. Nobody is saying it happens all the time. Just not that it's not nonsense.

LLMMLL · 01-11-2020 7:47pm

Gruffalux wrote: »

I have never called anyone evil or a pathetic loser. So there is no point in showing me that.

EXACTLY. So why do a few nuts on Twitter get commonly used to dismiss the respectful debate? You can't have it both ways.

You ignore use of the word ''transphobic''. It is obviously a term of abuse. It is similar to homophobic. It means the other hates or is disgusted by the person. It is a very abusive term which for some reason is casually permitted on here, just like TERF, which is another slur.

No it doesn't. You can be racist without supposedly hating people of other races. It's why people who claim to have "black friends" are widely derided when they say something racist. It just suits you to use the "hatred" definition that pretty much nobody uses anymore.

It is not in the least bit weird to consider genitals as fundamentally important when it comes to the matter of SEXUAL attraction and relationship. Note also that gay men are not being targeted in the same manner and instructed that they are hypocrites, transmisandrist trash, violent, etc if they are not wanting to fcuk people with pussies.

And that's not what the tweet said. It said that it's weird for those TERFs who make out that genitals is the ONLY thing they care about.

LLMMLL · 01-11-2020 7:48pm

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

It can be rare and not be nonsense at the same time. Nobody is saying it happens all the time. Just not that it's not nonsense.

That's fair enough. I'll freely admit there are some abusive nutters on Twitter.

Gruffalux · 01-11-2020 7:48pm

LLMMLL wrote: »

Nope you don't have to take one issue and decide you are going to dismiss all tweets/reports on it for all time. You can talk to people, do some research etc.

For example, in the metoo stuff, rather than just believe Twitter reports, I looked at experiences I had (observing the harrassment of women) and talked to women about what they had experienced. It unanimously confirmed what I read of the experiences of women on Twitter.

However in the case of lesbians being harrassed to sleep with transwomen literally ZERO of the many lesbians I know have experienced it, nor have the wider lesbian circles they themselves move in raised it as an issue.

It obviously IS happening though. Or is just a little bit okay in your book, like just a couple of male bodied prisoners in the female wing is okay. A little bit of abuse is tolerable. A girl or two or ten under pressure to be nice is not too bad.

LLMMLL · 01-11-2020 7:49pm

Smacruairi wrote: »

So you asked people you knew, one issue they had, other they hadn't, thus you went with your own anecdotal opinion, grand.

Say no more, unless it's your own bubble and you are affected it is just hearsay

Well in the absence of any kind of objective study on the issue then....yeah. Can you provide me with any figures as to the prevalence of this issue?

Gruffalux · 01-11-2020 7:50pm

LLMMLL wrote: »

Well in the absence of any kind of objective study on the issue then....yeah. Can you provide me with any figures as to the prevalence of this issue?

Receipts, is it?

ingalway · 01-11-2020 7:51pm

Dante7 wrote: »

This is going well for Panti.

https://twitter.com/PantiBliss/status/1322900409594351618?s=20

Oh the irony;
A gay white male who has made his career on the back of 'impersonating' (some might say no different to Black Face), oversexualising and demeaning women - gaymansplains to lesbians that they are not being targeted and harassed because they don't want ladydick.
Ultimate privilege.

Smacruairi · 01-11-2020 7:52pm

LLMMLL wrote: »

Well in the absence of any kind of objective study on the issue then....yeah. Can you provide me with any figures as to the prevalence of this issue?

That's called sealioning, and arguing in totally bad faith. You have been provided with websites, screenshot, articles, and more you want even more evidence because a couple of people you asked didn't seem to encounter it.

LLMMLL · 01-11-2020 7:53pm

Gruffalux wrote: »

It obviously IS happening though. Or is just a little bit okay in your book, like just a couple of male bodied prisoners in the female wing is okay. A little bit of abuse is tolerable. A girl or two or ten under pressure to be nice is not too bad.

You mean the 2 prisoners who are kept completely isolated from the other female prisoners?

Of course your completely manipulating what I'm saying. No abuse is not acceptable and you know well that is not my opinion. It's a pretty dodgy debating tactic.

What I actually mean is that when there is an extreme minority of abusers it should not be taken to be the Vast majority.

ingalway · 01-11-2020 7:54pm

LLMMLL wrote: »

Well in the absence of any kind of objective study on the issue then....yeah. Can you provide me with any figures as to the prevalence of this issue?

Well in the absence of any kind of objective study on the issue then....yeah. Can you provide me with any scientific studies that shows trans women are women and trans men are men and non-binary is...whatever it is?

LLMMLL · 01-11-2020 7:54pm

Smacruairi wrote: »

That's called sealioning, and arguing in totally bad faith. You have been provided with websites, screenshot, articles, and more you want even more evidence because a couple of people you asked didn't seem to encounter it.

Eh the screenshots were benign.

Sealioning, gaslighting..... What are you guys gonna come up with next?

Smacruairi · 01-11-2020 7:58pm

LLMMLL wrote: »

Eh the screenshots were benign.

Sealioning, gaslighting..... What are you guys gonna come up with next?

Come up with next, I don't know, maybe something mad, like the definition of a woman without resorting to "exemplars" or other such nonsense.

One eyed Jack · 01-11-2020 8:02pm

LLMMLL wrote: »

Eh the screenshots were benign.

Sealioning, gaslighting..... What are you guys gonna come up with next?

The one screenshot you asked for my opinion on was certainly not benign, but I can understand why you need to dismiss it as benign - you’re not the person who is being told to question your state of mind and having it undermined by being told your sexual orientation is the result of your environment and you should be open to experimenting with your sexuality.

It’s as though you’re not aware that it was tried before many times, this being one of the more notorious examples -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X-PgHSZh6U

I still have no idea how he was allowed get away with that shìte, I’ve seen videos taken down for less.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 01-11-2020 8:10pm

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

He should have said that then rather then just basically calling lesbians liars. He said it was bollox. So just completely denying it. He didn't say that it happens but it's an extreme.

I don't know how prevalent it is as I am not a lesbian but if lesbians are saying it's happening then I would be inclined to believe them. I don't really see a motivation for them to lie.

He hasn't replied to all the receipts provided. I'm kind of thinking who the **** does he think he is.

That’s it, it’s arrogant. Like, who is HE? I think fame has gone to his head a bit, like “I am the arbiter! I will decide if this is nonsense or not!”. When in reality, nobody owes him jack shit.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 01-11-2020 8:42pm

ingalway wrote: »

It's lesbian baiting.
It never takes long for the "if you exclude trans women, black women, women of size" blah blah blah then you are transphobic and a simpleton because you just don't understand you have been conned into believing in biological sex "rather than looking deeper and realize that our attraction are very much environmental"

Black women, disabled women, fat women, tall women, short women are all WOMEN. Trans women are biological males.

EXACTLY. This is so stupid. The reasons why black women were segregated were unconscionable. There is no comparison. Black women are female, white women are female. The reason for segregation was superficial and racist. Whereas transgender women are biological males and therefore stronger and we know that males are far more likely to be violent. That doesn’t mean I think all men are violent before somebody says that. That’s where the comparison to gay rights breaks down too. Gay women are females.

seenitall · 01-11-2020 8:45pm

I wonder what the end goal to all this rowing is. How can anyone possibly be that arrogant and deluded that they think they can break through a ‘cotton ceiling’ by force of will and re-education? It really is like hoping to pray the gay away. Like, “lesbians are suddenly gonna see the light and start craving cock if we are just persistent and offensive enough”. I am failing to see a bigger picture here. So much so, that it is starting to look like just plain old sexism, all dressed up and nowhere to go, so the frustration and the insults come out.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 01-11-2020 8:55pm

ingalway wrote: »

Oh the irony;
A gay white male who has made his career on the back of 'impersonating' (some might say no different to Black Face), oversexualising and demeaning women - gaymansplains to lesbians that they are not being targeted and harassed because they don't want ladydick.
Ultimate privilege.

Interestingly Panti was accused of being transphobic a few years back himself because he does drag and used to refer to himself as a trannie. It’s hard to keep up.

seenitall wrote: »

I wonder what the end goal to all this rowing is. How can anyone possibly be that arrogant and deluded that they think they can break through a ‘cotton ceiling’ by force of will and re-education? It really is like hoping to pray the gay away. Like, “lesbians are suddenly gonna see the light and start craving cock if we are just persistent and offensive enough”. I am failing to see a bigger picture here. So much so, that it is starting to look like just plain old sexism, all dressed up and nowhere to go, so the frustration and the insults come out.

Ding ding ding. Misogyny with a lovely progressive coating. Socially acceptable misogyny.

One eyed Jack · 01-11-2020 9:24pm

Just finished reading this piece on Martina Navratilova in yesterday’s Irish Times, and the absolute bang of irony off it is really something -

Navratilova married her wife, Julia Lemigova, in 2014. She says that “life has gotten much better for us LGBTQ people around the world” but cautions that the community “still has a long way to go”.

“It’s still punishable by death in some countries. Certainly there are prison sentences in many countries. We’re talking about sports and people getting paid equally but people are still getting penalised for being who they are around the world so there are a lot of battles to be fought. I was just glad that I was able to do my part and help people be themselves and help move the laws forward in the right direction.

“One day we won’t have to say it. One day we won’t have to define ourselves or validate ourselves or say, ‘I’m gay, hear me roar!’ One day it won’t matter.”

Now 64, Navratilova continues to speak out on issues. Occasionally, she has drawn criticism for her views. Last year, she came under fire when she wrote that allowing transgender women to compete in women’s sports was “insane” and akin to “cheating”. As a result, she was dropped as an ambassador by Athlete Ally, an LGBTQ athletic advisory group. She subsequently made a documentary on the subject for the BBC and has since stated that her desire is to “include as many trans girls and women as possible while keeping a level playing field for girls and women in sports”.

Elsewhere, she continues to be vocal about issues within tennis. Earlier this year, she and John McEnroe called for the Margaret Court Arena in Australia to be renamed. Court holds the all-time record for the most Grand Slam title, but has been a vocal critic of homosexuality and same-sex marriage in recent years.

As such, Navratilova believes it would be more appropriate for the arena to be renamed in honour of Evonne Goolagong-Cawley.

“Margaret will forever be a tennis champion. She’s just not a human rights champion. When you name buildings after people, it’s for the body of work. It’s not for one thing they did really well, it’s for who they are as human beings.

“The idea of still revering someone who is actively harming people just rubs me the wrong way. I don’t take it personally even though she made it personal 30 years ago. It’s not about me. I know who I am and I am okay with it. But there are still people struggling with their sexuality and their sexual orientation and this is not helpful.

“To be revering and honouring people like that by naming buildings or streets or airports after them, that’s not okay. That’s why we’re taking down some statues, right?”

She also doesn’t hold back when I ask her about Novak Djokovic. The men’s number one has had quite the 2020. During the summer, he organised a tennis tournament, at which he and several other top players contracted Covid-19. His plans for a breakaway tennis players’ association were also criticised when it was found the group was excluding women. (He has since said that he is open to women joining.)

Martina Navratilova: ‘If I had Twitter 30 years ago, I would have been raising holy hell’

I could swear the woman has bigger cojones than I do!

ceadaoin. · 01-11-2020 9:25pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Ding ding ding. Misogyny with a lovely progressive coating. Socially acceptable misogyny.

Yep. Spot the difference? I genuinely cant. The only difference seems to be that when the male identifies as a woman, the below behaviour is acceptable

Incel stands for "involuntary celibate" – the name assumed by deeply misogynistic men who believe women are to blame for their lack of sexual intimacy. Incels often believe women should be verbally shamed and, in extreme, physically punished with sexual assault, rape or disfigurement.

Annasopra · 02-11-2020 7:59am

Its really fascinating watching this if you ask me. Anti trans ideology wasnt particularly working very well so they looked around to who their allies were and decided to turn their allies against them. Thats what all this drivel about trans existence being homophobic is really about - trying to get lesbian gay and bi people to turn against our trans brothers and sisters and trying to get the general population to believe this insanely nonsensical idea that the existence of lgb trans people is homophobic, biphobic or lesbophobic.

Gruffalux · 02-11-2020 9:00am

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Its really fascinating watching this if you ask me. Anti trans ideology wasnt particularly working very well so they looked around to who their allies were and decided to turn their allies against them. Thats what all this drivel about trans existence being homophobic is really about - trying to get lesbian gay and bi people to turn against our trans brothers and sisters and trying to get the general population to believe this insanely nonsensical idea that the existence of lgb trans people is homophobic, biphobic or lesbophobic.

Incredible the power of this unknown "they".
'They' look around them, hatching their terrible cackling plots, and then like body snatchers 'they' turn the heads of the poor addled lgb people and 'they' make them defend same sex attraction as being...well...based on actual sex and not gender identity. It's a conspiracy, I tells ya. As usual "they" are behind it all.

Wibbs · 02-11-2020 9:02am

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

homophobic, biphobic or lesbophobic.

Well that's a lot of phobics being thrown around. Frankly at this point I'm getting phobicphobic with it all.

The thing I've noticed about this Trans debate is the almost entire lack of female to male Trans in the mix. Pretty much nada. No idiotic calls for straight women to blindly accept "gentleman vulvas" or they're "transhpobic", no M-F screaming loonies on Twitter going on about these endless phobias. F-M Trans seem to be just getting on with their lives for the most part and this nonsense is almost entirely a M-F Trans narrative.

Wibbs · 02-11-2020 9:07am

Gruffalux wrote: »

Incredible the power of this unknown "they".

And it's also a sure sign of any politic going towards the nuttier end, a sure sign that their arguments are beginning to look porous, a sure sign that it's far more about what they believe to be true, rather than what may actually be true, and it goes for no matter what left, right, whatever you're having yourself political compass you care to think of. You'll find the same thing played out on both the fringes of the most "progressive" rantings on twitter as well as stormfront.

Gruffalux · 02-11-2020 9:22am

Wibbs wrote: »

And it's also a sure sign of any politic going towards the nuttier end, a sure sign that their arguments are beginning to look porous, a sure sign that it's far more about what they believe to be true, rather than what may actually be true, and it goes for no matter what left, right, whatever you're having yourself political compass you care to think of. You'll find the same thing played out on both the fringes of the most "progressive" rantings on twitter as well as stormfront.

I know. The first places I saw the mysterious "they" was years ago on right wing parts of interweb. But it seems "they" have diversified to do all manner of evil things.

One eyed Jack · 02-11-2020 9:33am

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Its really fascinating watching this if you ask me. Anti trans ideology wasnt particularly working very well so they looked around to who their allies were and decided to turn their allies against them. Thats what all this drivel about trans existence being homophobic is really about - trying to get lesbian gay and bi people to turn against our trans brothers and sisters and trying to get the general population to believe this insanely nonsensical idea that the existence of lgb trans people is homophobic, biphobic or lesbophobic.

With all due respect Joey, who needs the LGB Alliance to create division and spread resentment when they have the likes of Rory O’ Neill demanding that women provide him with proof or it didn’t happen?

Who needs the LGB Alliance when women who aren’t completely on board with the whole transgender ideology are dismissed by other women as TERFs and all sorts of other vile epithets?

Who needs the LGB Alliance when Martina Navratilova complains about how she was treated, and then joins John McEnroe in trying to have Margaret Court written out of the history books and then tries to claim it’s nothing personal, just a 30 year resentment where she’s now in a position of power and the first thing she wants to do is write another woman’s achievements out of the history books?

Who needs anti-trans ideology with ‘allies’ and brothers and sisters like that? Nobody should need to prove to anyone that they’re being treated unfairly, people should see it for themselves, it’s worse when there are people who refuse to acknowledge that the behaviour goes on, and then get all uppity when people want nothing to do with them because they don’t feel supported, and they go seeking support elsewhere. Why should anyone continue to support people who they feel don’t support them, and not just don’t support them, but want to put them down?

Instead of defending the behaviour, it would do more to acknowledge that it’s just wrong, and there’s nothing justifies punching down on other people when the little bit of power someone feels they have over others goes to their heads.

“Our trans brothers and sisters”... how about just our brothers and sisters, and leave the identity politics out of it? Last time I checked people who are transgender were part of the general population too and were held to the same standards of behaviour as everyone else - treat people as you would like to be treated.

LLMMLL · 02-11-2020 9:47am

Wibbs wrote: »

Well that's a lot of phobics being thrown around. Frankly at this point I'm getting phobicphobic with it all.

The thing I've noticed about this Trans debate is the almost entire lack of female to male Trans in the mix. Pretty much nada. No idiotic calls for straight women to blindly accept "gentleman vulvas" or they're "transhpobic", no M-F screaming loonies on Twitter going on about these endless phobias. F-M Trans seem to be just getting on with their lives for the most part and this nonsense is almost entirely a M-F Trans narrative.

And this is because TERF ideology 100% centres around the idea that ciswomen need to be protected from transwomen or the bogey-cis-men who apparently will pretend to be trans to assault them.

It's really quite an insane PR Enterprise that TERFs centred the debate around transwomen, then complain that the debate tends to not mention transmen.

LLMMLL · 02-11-2020 9:50am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

“Our trans brothers and sisters”... how about just our brothers and sisters, and leave the identity politics out of it? Last time I checked people who are transgender were part of the general population too and were held to the same standards of behaviour as everyone else - treat people as you would like to be treated.

Lol in a thread about trans people you Have an issue with someone saying "trans brothers and sisters"?

I think he is treating others as he wants to be treated.....with respect.

Smacruairi · 02-11-2020 9:52am

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Its really fascinating watching this if you ask me. Anti trans ideology wasnt particularly working very well so they looked around to who their allies were and decided to turn their allies against them. Thats what all this drivel about trans existence being homophobic is really about - trying to get lesbian gay and bi people to turn against our trans brothers and sisters and trying to get the general population to believe this insanely nonsensical idea that the existence of lgb trans people is homophobic, biphobic or lesbophobic.

Who is they? Who organised this? How was this organised?

One eyed Jack · 02-11-2020 10:05am

LLMMLL wrote: »

Lol in a thread about trans people you Have an issue with someone saying "trans brothers and sisters"?

I think he is treating others as he wants to be treated.....with respect.

The thread isn’t just about people who are transgender though? The reason for the thread being started is because JK Rowling thinks she’s in a position to determine who does or doesn’t qualify as a woman from her perspective because someone was mean to her on Twitter and now she’s choosing to take it out on other people who have nothing to do with her while claiming it’s her rights are being suppressed.

I don’t have an issue at all with Joey using the term “trans brothers and sisters”, I just don’t remember ever referring to my brothers and sister that way. I do remember how I found out Santa Claus wasn’t real when I fought with my sister on Christmas morning over a doll I thought Santa left for me, and our parents had to intervene, but that’s a whole other story :pac:

I didn’t suggest either that Joey wasn’t treating people with respect, I know he always has done, I wouldn’t bother my arse engaging with someone who doesn’t. I was referring to people who don’t, like Panto Bliss demanding of women that they prove themselves to him, like Jessica Yanniv inquiring of adolescent children about their time of the month - it’s unfortunate that some young women would think they have to entertain these weirdos, but it’s because of their behaviour that I can understand why someone like JK is as popular among women as she is for standing up to them.

Gervais08 · 02-11-2020 10:07am

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Its really fascinating watching this if you ask me. Anti trans ideology wasnt particularly working very well so they looked around to who their allies were and decided to turn their allies against them. Thats what all this drivel about trans existence being homophobic is really about - trying to get lesbian gay and bi people to turn against our trans brothers and sisters and trying to get the general population to believe this insanely nonsensical idea that the existence of lgb trans people is homophobic, biphobic or lesbophobic.

That is absolute drivel.

There is no brotherhood - else there wouldn’t be creepy f**king men attending workshops on the “cotton ceiling”; the concept of “girldique” would die up its own arse where it belongs and gay people would not have to be told that their hardwired DNA level sexual orientation, as real as being left handed or black is an “identity” they chose.

Get away with the trans bull, it’s doing a disservice to gay people.

LLMMLL · 02-11-2020 10:08am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The thread isn’t just about people who are transgender though? The reason for the thread being started is because JK Rowling thinks she’s in a position to determine who does or doesn’t qualify as a woman from her perspective because someone was mean to her on Twitter and now she’s choosing to take it out on other people who have nothing to do with her while claiming it’s her rights are being suppressed.

I don’t have an issue at all with Joey using the term “trans brothers and sisters”, I just don’t remember ever referring to my brothers and sister that way. I do remember how I found out Santa Claus wasn’t real when I fought with my sister on Christmas morning over a doll I thought Santa left for me, and our parents had to intervene, but that’s a whole other story :pac:

I didn’t suggest either that Joey wasn’t treating people with respect, I know he always has done, I wouldn’t bother my arse engaging with someone who doesn’t. I was referring to people who don’t, like Panto Bliss demanding of women that they prove themselves to him, like Jessica Yanniv inquiring of adolescent children about their time of the month - it’s unfortunate that some young women would think they have to entertain these weirdos, but it’s because of their behaviour that I can understand why someone like JK is as popular among women as she is for standing up to them.

Ok so we will continue to refer to trans people in a thread that is (mostly) about trans people.......glad we cleared that rather odd left turn up.

ProfessorPlum · 02-11-2020 10:08am

LLMMLL wrote: »

Lol in a thread about trans people you Have an issue with someone saying "trans brothers and sisters"?

I think he is treating others as he wants to be treated.....with respect.

Wow. Totally transphobic non inclusive language right there. ‘Trans brothers and sisters’. This is causing the deaths of non binary people who don’t identify with gendered concepts such as brother or sister. If you had used ‘trans siblings’, perhaps these people would not have been so terribly harmed.

How very dare you.

briangriffin · 02-11-2020 10:22am

LLMMLL wrote: »

And this is because TERF ideology 100% centres around the idea that ciswomen need to be protected from transwomen or the bogey-cis-men who apparently will pretend to be trans to assault them.

It's really quite an insane PR Enterprise that TERFs centred the debate around transwomen, then complain that the debate tends to not mention transmen.

Christ almighty- thats some cognitive dissonance. What Wibbs was clearly stating there was the major issues with this entire ideology are coming from a select group of transwomen which would lead us to believe that there is a certain amount of misyogony at play.
You have linked previously to a post where it was said that lesbians who don't like dick are trans misyoginists? Do you believe that to be true? Do you believe a lesbian who refuses to date a transwoman is transphobic?
If a heterosexual man refuses to date a homosexual man does that make him homophobic?
Or are you saying that genitalia are not important that in a relationship a sexual relationship genitalia are an after thought. A "surprise" awaits every relationship. The ultimate goal appears to be to convince younger people today that lesbians can have a penis and to not accept that is transphobic and unenlightened, it is going to ultimately make life more difficult for actual gender dysphoric trans people who are just trying to live their lives. The live and let live mantra has gotten so far, push back started when trans women entered women only sports, and children were being told they could be born in the wrong bodies.

One eyed Jack · 02-11-2020 10:24am

LLMMLL wrote: »

Ok so we will continue to refer to trans people in a thread that is (mostly) about trans people.......glad we cleared that rather odd left turn up.

You can continue to refer to people however you like L, you do you and all that, I’m not demanding that either yourself or Joey stop referring to people however you wish. The point I was making to Joey is that identity politics doesn’t help, these issues transcend identity politics as far as I’m concerned. I’ve already explained in the thread that I don’t use terms like “trans women” or “trans men”, I’ve never needed to because I’m not an advocate of identity politics.

That’s why I felt it was unnecessary to refer to “trans brothers and sisters” as opposed to just brothers and sisters, especially when Joey was trying to make the point about not fostering division and resentment, while at the same time singling out people who are transgender as a distinct group for special consideration.

It’s precisely because of identity politics that some people are so wrapped up in themselves, as opposed to the general population which just doesn’t buy into that identity politics nonsense, because they really are thinking of people other than themselves - they already know people aren’t so one-dimensional, they don’t need to be schooled in intersectional identity politics ideology.

LLMMLL · 02-11-2020 10:27am

briangriffin wrote: »

Christ almighty- thats some cognitive dissonance. What Wibbs was clearly stating there was the major issues with this entire ideology are coming from a select group of transwomen which would lead us to believe that there is a certain amount of misyogony at play.

Eh wibbs never mentioned a select group of trans women. No idea where you're getting that. What he actually said was that the debate centres around transwomem and not transmen.

And this is clearly because of TERF ideology, not because of transwomen.

LLMMLL · 02-11-2020 10:31am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You can continue to refer to people however you like L, you do you and all that, I’m not demanding that either yourself or Joey stop referring to people however you wish. The point I was making to Joey is that identity politics doesn’t help, these issues transcend identity politics as far as I’m concerned. I’ve already explained in the thread that I don’t use terms like “trans women” or “trans men”, I’ve never needed to because I’m not an advocate of identity politics.

That’s why I felt it was unnecessary to refer to “trans brothers and sisters” as opposed to just brothers and sisters, especially when Joey was trying to make the point about not fostering division and resentment, while at the same time singling out people who are transgender as a distinct group for special consideration.

It’s precisely because of identity politics that some people are so wrapped up in themselves, as opposed to the general population which just doesn’t buy into that identity politics nonsense, because they really are thinking of people other than themselves - they already know people aren’t so one-dimensional, they don’t need to be schooled in intersectional identity politics ideology.

I'd actually love to delete the word trans from every post in this thread and see does it make any sense.

It would basically be like:

TRA: women should be allowed use women's bathrooms

TERF: No! Women are men. Nobody will get me to accept that WAW.

How on Earth would a debate on trans issues progress without mentioning trans people.

RWCNT · 02-11-2020 10:34am

Gervais08 wrote: »

That is absolute drivel.

There is no brotherhood - else there wouldn’t be creepy f**king men attending workshops on the “cotton ceiling”; the concept of “girldique” would die up its own arse where it belongs and gay people would not have to be told that their hardwired DNA level sexual orientation, as real as being left handed or black is an “identity” they chose.

Get away with the trans bull, it’s doing a disservice to gay people.

I'd imagine the "brothers and sisters" comment is likely a reference to the fact trans people were leaders in fighting for gay rights from the very beginning.

Who says that "identity" is something that's chosen btw? I thought the idea that identity is innate and not something an individual chooses was pretty central to the whole concept of transgenderism?

Wibbs · 02-11-2020 10:39am

LLMMLL wrote: »

And this is because TERF ideology 100% centres around the idea that ciswomen need to be protected from transwomen or the bogey-cis-men who apparently will pretend to be trans to assault them.

It's really quite an insane PR Enterprise that TERFs centred the debate around transwomen, then complain that the debate tends to not mention transmen.

Bollocks frankly. Where are the F-M Trans folks looking to be included in checking for testicular cancer? Where are F-M Trans folks looking to be included in male sports?(and there are a few already doing that sort of thing) Where are F-M Trans folks looking to have women regard their vulvas as mickeys? Nowhere pretty much. It's nearly all about M-F and it has been long before the so called "TERF" brigade got into it.

As an aside I've had my bloody fill of this "cis" nonsense at this stage. :rolleyes: Try to redefine language and biology and medical science all you like, but bugger all are buying into it any more. If they ever really did. Using US college campus makey uppy definitions will almost insure most people never will.

Gruffalux · 02-11-2020 10:39am

briangriffin wrote: »

Christ almighty- thats some cognitive dissonance. What Wibbs was clearly stating there was the major issues with this entire ideology are coming from a select group of transwomen which would lead us to believe that there is a certain amount of misyogony at play.
You have linked previously to a post where it was said that lesbians who don't like dick are trans misyoginists? Do you believe that to be true? Do you believe a lesbian who refuses to date a transwoman is transphobic?
If a heterosexual man refuses to date a homosexual man does that make him homophobic?
Or are you saying that genitalia are not important that in a relationship a sexual relationship genitalia are an after thought. A "surprise" awaits every relationship. The ultimate goal appears to be to convince younger people today that lesbians can have a penis and to not accept that is transphobic and unenlightened, it is going to ultimately make life more difficult for actual gender dysphoric trans people who are just trying to live their lives. The live and let live mantra has gotten so far, push back started when trans women entered women only sports, and children were being told they could be born in the wrong bodies.

Yes we have arrived to the PC destination where to hope for certain genitalia on a prospective lover is bio-essentialist, cis-sexist, bigoted reduction of people to their genitals. Personally I can hardly wait to see to what further exotic destinations this magic bus will take us.

suicide_circus · 02-11-2020 10:41am

This is why gay and trans can make uncomfortable bed fellows (wink) in terms of organisational groupings.

Gay people don't require the general public to validate their gayness. They know they're gay. Where as SOME vocal trans people require confirmation and validation of their perferred gender via pronouns, access to spaces etc.

One eyed Jack · 02-11-2020 10:43am

LLMMLL wrote: »

Eh wibbs never mentioned a select group of trans women. No idea where you're getting that. What he actually said was that the debate centres around transwomem and not transmen.

And this is clearly because of TERF ideology, not because of transwomen.

There isn’t any “TERF ideology” though? There’s a branch of feminism which regards men as women, and any feminist who doesn’t share that ideology is dismissed as a “TERF”. The term itself comes from feminists being told that they must accept men as women, but the reason those women identified themselves as feminists in the first place is because they were advocating for women’s rights and women’s welfare, not men’s rights or men’s welfare.

Now along comes men who not alone do they claim to be women, but they also claim to be feminists, and suggest that if women don’t accept men are women, they’re to be condemned as “TERFS” and shamed and humiliated into silence.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why women who imagine they are men prefer not to put their heads above the parapet. Unfortunately that has the consequences of young girls using chest binders and injecting themselves with hormones they’re ordering off the internet until they can get what has been euphemistically called “top surgery”, the reality being that they are having their breasts removed, precisely because they develop gender dysphoria as a consequence of being uncomfortable with the idea of what it means to be a girl who will without intervention become a woman - womanhood is essentially being defined by men, who are still dominating women.

mohawk · 02-11-2020 10:44am

LLMMLL wrote: »

And this is because TERF ideology 100% centres around the idea that ciswomen need to be protected from transwomen or the bogey-cis-men who apparently will pretend to be trans to assault them.

It's really quite an insane PR Enterprise that TERFs centred the debate around transwomen, then complain that the debate tends to not mention transmen.

If I read an article relating to men’s health. The article will always mention men in it. The same can’t be said when reading about women’s health. Just last week I saw some company raising awareness about PCOS and called the women who have it menstrators. Now one of the biggest symptoms of PCOS is not menstrating. Instead of using inclusive language in women’s health campaigns such as women and transmen. The language reduces us down to a body part or a bodily function. It’s not inclusive and it is demeaning. Women want to be referred to as women and not cervix havers or whatever. If you can’t see the issue here then that says a lot about how you view women.

LLMMLL · 02-11-2020 10:46am

Wibbs wrote: »

Bollocks frankly. Where are the F-M Trans folks looking to be included in checking for testicular cancer? Where are F-M Trans folks looking to be included in male sports?(and there are a few already doing that sort of thing) Where are F-M Trans folks looking to have women regard their vulvas as mickeys? Nowhere pretty much. It's nearly all about M-F and it has been long before the so called "TERF" brigade got into it.

As an aside I've had my bloody fill of this "cis" nonsense at this stage. :rolleyes: Try to redefine language and biology and medical science all you like, but bugger all are buying into it any more. If they ever really did. Using US college campus makey uppy definitions will almost insure most people never will.

Eh there are.numerous examples of transmen in sport. A quick Google will enlighten you on this. The difference is that TERFs do not make a fuss about this as they do with transwomen. It is TERF ideology which centres the debate around trans and cis women.

One eyed Jack · 02-11-2020 10:47am

LLMMLL wrote: »

I'd actually love to delete the word trans from every post in this thread and see does it make any sense.

It would basically be like:

TRA: women should be allowed use women's bathrooms

TERF: No! Women are men. Nobody will get me to accept that WAW.

How on Earth would a debate on trans issues progress without mentioning trans people.

Use your imagination. It’s what you expect everyone else to do.

I’m so going to hell for that one :pac:

suicide_circus · 02-11-2020 10:49am

BOOOM!!

LLMMLL · 02-11-2020 10:52am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There isn’t any “TERF ideology” though? There’s a branch of feminism which regards men as women, and any feminist who doesn’t share that ideology is dismissed as a “TERF”. The term itself comes from feminists being told that they must accept men as women, but the reason those women identified themselves as feminists in the first place is because they were advocating for women’s rights and women’s welfare, not men’s rights or men’s welfare.

Now along comes men who not alone do they claim to be women, but they also claim to be feminists, and suggest that if women don’t accept men are women, they’re to be condemned as “TERFS” and shamed and humiliated into silence.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why women who imagine they are men prefer not to put their heads above the parapet. Unfortunately that has the consequences of young girls using chest binders and injecting themselves with hormones they’re ordering off the internet until they can get what has been euphemistically called “top surgery”, the reality being that they are having their breasts removed, precisely because they develop gender dysphoria as a consequence of being uncomfortable with the idea of what it means to be a girl who will without intervention become a woman - womanhood is essentially being defined by men, who are still dominating women.

I'm afraid you're incorrect. There is a clear TERF ideology. TERFs are a specific grouping of people with specific opinions about trans rights.

They quite cleverly tried to rebrand the word TERF that accurately sums up their views as an insult, and both surprisingly and unfortunately you seem to have fallen for it.

suicide_circus · 02-11-2020 10:54am

LLMMLL wrote: »

I'm afraid you're incorrect. There is a clear TERF ideology. TERFs are a specific grouping of people with specific opinions about trans rights.

They quite cleverly tried to rebrand the word TERF that accurately sums up their views as an insult, and both surprisingly and unfortunately you seem to have fallen for it.

Would you accept that there is a Trans ideology? Or is TERF the only ideology at play?

J. K. Rowling is cancelled because she is a T.E.R.F [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

Comments