Graham Linehan given police warning for "transphobia"

Patww79 wrote: »

I wouldn't bother trying. Their main point of view is that you'll always be wrong anyway.

Or it’ll change once you get it - something else will come along

I followed Linehan on Twitter for a while because I thought he would be funny, but no...he's just a massive bellend.

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

There can sometimes be an attitude of "I'm wise enough, I don't need to learn new things".

What new things do they need to learn?

Don’t think anyone comes out of this looking well.

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

I think it's always a good idea to fight against that sort of faux-weary obstinate/incurious/lazy/willfully ignorant attitude that sometimes comes with age. It's not that complicated.

Oh indeed, it's not complicated at all is it?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/10930654/Facebooks-71-gender-options-come-to-UK-users.html

Of course it's not complicated if you treat it for the load of tripe that it is, but I'm guessing that isn't what you meant. Let's not forget that we're not talking about some sort of new technology such as learning how to use a computer or something, we're talking about the discarding of a very reasonable and logical explanation for how human life (and by association all mammalian life) works. There's no issue with challenging our views of long-held "truths" but let us challenge that with evidence and a proper debate, not by bullying and social shame for having the guts to go against some sort of cultural trend.

We're also left with the odd situation of ignoring things we know to be true, all because of social expectations. For example, we're led to pretend that Bruce Jenner, the world famous Olympic decathlete, became a woman in his mid-60's! Actually that's not quite right is it, we are expected to go along with the person we know to be Bruce being a woman, but we are also to go along with the idea that Bruce was a woman in the process of winning those medals! I'll put it plainly that I really do not believe that to be reasonable or fair on people. To compound matters, not only are we to consider the winner of the gold medal for the decathlon in the 1976 Olympic Games to be a man, it wasn't Bruce (who is that?), it was Caitlyn! No thanks.

Patww79 wrote: »

I wouldn't bother trying. Their main point of view is that you'll always be wrong anyway.

Yep. It is exactly the point. There's always going to be people who insist on living outside of society's Venn diagram, and everybody else is to blame.

If T becomes an almost unspectacular way of life in the same way that homosexuality has nowadays, then you can expect some sort of new letter in the mix there as the "downtrodden and ignored for far too long".

I'm fairly confused by this whole thing. Not that I'd ever spend much time thinking about this sort of stuff.

Linehan was a darling of the Twitterati for many years now. Which is grand. Left-leaning middle class sorts are entitled to their opinion. You'd sometimes question if they could ever truly practice what they preach, but that's for another day.

What I don't get is that he is being backed this evening by some extremely prominent feminist academics. Some of them are on the fringes of radical theory regarding politics and gender. Yet, others who appear to be men of the same political persuasion are throwing online stones at him. What gives?

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

I think it's always a good idea to fight against that sort of faux-weary obstinate/incurious/lazy/willfully ignorant attitude that sometimes comes with age. It's not that complicated.

Now that's what I call a nice short sharp response. Wish I could do that.

Now I can understand why you might say that but I'm going to respond to show you that I genuinely mean what I said to show you I'm not quite as incurious and unthinking you seem to think I am.

Obviously I'm not confused about what a transgender person is what I am confused about is the other stuff. The other stuff meaning the talking on the opposite sex's appearance with clothes hair etc and the public convenience issues. I'll leave the pronoun thing out of it cause that's been done to death recently.

So in recent years cis woman have been fighting for equal rights. Part of how all this inequality has come about has partly been blamed on stereotyping attitudes. I.e. women aren't suited to this job that men do, women are more suited for caring roles etc etc. And it works the other way round too in respect of men. We have progressed socially such that all that attitude is frowned on, women can do all the jobs men can do, are just as capable in every respect.

Also in recent years our outward appearance has changed in respect of fashion. Men groom more than they used too, women aren't expected to wear skirts,. Although cis men don't yet wear skirts we are at a stage where if they did we'd prolly get used to it.

So this is what confuses me. I don't understand why one's outward appearance matters so much to transsexuals. It seems to me that to 'look like' a woman say, is a reversal of the way we are going socially. What difference does it make. Do they expect to be treated differently by everyone else because of a stereotypical gender look? And if so how do they expect to be treated differently and do they think it's right that they are. In the case of a transgender woman they could only be expected to treated worse in society than if they continued to dress like a man.

The whole idea of being treated or regarded in a certain way due to ones gender is I though something we want to get rid of but transexuals seem not to want that but keep the old system which is NOT the socially progressive attitude you'd think they'd have. Also in respect of the public convenience you would think it wouldn't be a big deal for a transwoman to be happy to use a cis mens facility but no they insist they should be allowed and want to use the cis womans facilities.

If that didn't make sense let me put it this way. If cisgender society developed to a stage where one can't tell what gender one is based on their clothing ie men wore dresses and woman grew moustaches (some can ) how would transgenders feel about that and how would they dress then? If this post does nothing else it does at least prove I am genuinely confused.

Generally speaking, I find it amusing how everything is a "phobia", the obvious connotation being that you must be "brave" if you have accepted such and such a thing.

Tricksy!

FTA69 wrote: »

What gives? The British left are acting like the British left i.e a bunch of bizarre, cranky, comfrontational and divisive headers. It's funny, I know a lot of people on the 'activisty cool left' who would berate some traditional union type as "some old white dude in a flat cap". The irony is that your average miserable middle aged union Convenor from Birmingham or whatever will look and sound far more normal and approachable than half of these balloons.

Since living here I've been called (repeatedly) a misogynist, a racist, a transphobe, an anti-Semite, an Islamophobe, a homophobe and a conservative. Despite the fact I'm a ****ing dyed-red socialist who works as a union organiser, has a black partner and who spent years working in a Muslim community centre. God forbid the loopy fringe of the left ever meet the average working class Brit or they'd absolutely expire.

I don't share your socialist politics to any great extent, even though I'd classify myself as a social/christian democrat. But at least I understand your socialism. I get it, and I appreciate it. It's a working class ideal about the economic betterment of everyone in a society of equals. Just think the way of doing that is wrong, as Marx was wrong. But that's for another thread.

You're the best left-wing poster on Boards by a country mile.

Milo Savory Joyrider wrote: »

It should be a Twitter matter imo, not a police matter.

That's what I meant by saying it's Frankensteinesque as him and his ilk are the kind that wanted things like this to be a police matter.