Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…197198200202203…207

Comments

  • Options
    #5972
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    their issue with the word cis is that there shouldn't be a word to describe them as a subgroup of.women as they believe themselves to be the only group describable by the word "woman".

    In this case no.word would be acceptable to them if we replaced cis with it.

    Adult human females are not a subset of woman. They are the set. Cis cannot qualify or sub divide the indivisible ontological category of women. Or men. Or girls. Etc.

    If you are desperately looking for a denoter word to attach to me to politically signify me to others, logical will do, thanks. Put me on the list.


  • Options
    #5973
    Sittingpretty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,872 ✭✭✭Sittingpretty


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    I'm not sure they'll move onto another group. I think they'll become more mired in conspiracy theory. Maybe move on to something like anti-vaccinations.

    If you don't post in this thread and let TERFs talk to each other it really descends into some quite paranoid bizarre stuff. Take a look at the mumsnet anti trans forum and there's people who have not been affected by trans people at all saying they are suicidal over the "Erasure of women". Unhappiness has to find a target, and it's not always hate. Sometimes it's just plain old paranoia.

    And........delusion is back in the room!


  • Options
    #5974
    CtevenSrowder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,909 ✭✭✭CtevenSrowder


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    Not when getting rid of the "unwanted moniker" is part of a PR campaign to prevent discussion.

    It's not that cis people have a problem with the word cis. TERFs have a problem with any word that describes them as a group. It's been repeatedly stated on this thread by TERFs that their issue with the word cis is that there shouldn't be a word to describe them as a subgroup of.women as they believe themselves to be the only group describable by the word "woman".

    In this case no.word would be acceptable to them if we replaced cis with it.

    In the case of genuinely offensive words to describe groups of people such as racist or homophobic slurs, the people who are targets of these actually offensive words will be happy to be referred to as a group and there are acceptable words to describe them. Also, they didn't just randomly take a dislike to these words. The words have been used as part of a loooong history of oppression.

    But if someone who is trying to curb the right of trans people doesn't like a word I use to describe them...tough. If they were an opressed group and the word had genuinely been used as a slur, then I wouldn't use it. But I'm not capitulating to their PR efforts to play the victim.

    The word cis is not required because you have, for example, men and trans-men. See, distinction made without needing the word cis. It is an unnecessary prefix that many don't like being labeled with. You could also say trans and non-trans but for some reason refuse to. Again, cis is not required.

    As I said, you'll bang on about respect until the cows come home but expect it to go in one direction only, and won't be respectful of others wishes, instead you engage in mental gymsnastics to try and paint over your double standard.

    Again, and this is the take home message, the word cis is not required. And if you still believe a distinction other that woman/transwomen is required - which you do as you are willfully ignorant of what makes someone a women-- you can use trans and non-trans. No need for cis.

    But let's be honest, you'll still use it as you know people don't like it, along with TERF, but sure isn't that the point.


  • Options
    #5975
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭Effects


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    No because an attack helicopter has defined parameters. 'Man' or 'Woman' are just amorphous interchangable blobs with no particular characteristics.

    Why are you so quick to define parameters for an attack helicopter?
    Not too long ago having a knob was a particular characteristic of being a man.


  • Options
    #5976
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    CtevenSrowder wrote: »
    Non binary is a load of attention seeking nonsense. It should not be confused with transsexualism which is an actual real issue.
    It's another one of those labels that society seems to be looking for in a largely post old certainties western world, though TBH I can kinda see the non binary thing. Someone who feels like the label of man/woman/gay/straight doesn't quite fit them(though who fits them 100%), so feel better with a label and self explanation and like minded people with the same label out there. And that's fine such as it is. Yes it can be argued it's yet another quasi adolescent navel gazing self indulgence, but most of us are err to that at one time or another and humans have always done similar along personal, societal and tribal lines. I'm not aware of any pushing any particular agenda onto wider society. Beyond pushing for makey uppy pronouns.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5977
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    Wibbs wrote: »
    It's another one of those labels that society seems to be looking for in a largely post old certainties western world, though TBH I can kinda see the non binary thing. Someone who feels like the label of man/woman/gay/straight doesn't quite fit them(though who fits them 100%), so feel better with a label and self explanation and like minded people with the same label out there. And that's fine such as it is. Yes it can be argued it's yet another quasi adolescent navel gazing self indulgence, but most of us are err to that at one time or another and humans have always done similar along personal, societal and tribal lines. I'm not aware of any pushing any particular agenda onto wider society. Beyond pushing for makey uppy pronouns.

    I wouldn’t consider myself stereotypically a girly girl - loads of typically “boys” interests. Hate kids, not nurturing, vocabulary of a sailor etc.

    But I’m a woman, an adult human female - and the stereotypes are wrong. I’m not non-binary (that’s made up nonsense) - I’m just a girl who isn’t afraid to stick two fingers up to stereotypes and be myself.

    It’s the annoying ones that piss me off - one sort said “you old people judge me because you’ve never seen anyone like me”.

    No just Bowie, Marc Bolan, The Sweet, Steve Strange, Leigh Bowery, Adam Ant, the New Romantics etc etc etc - give it a rest you pointless attention seekers!!!!


  • Options
    #5978
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Effects wrote: »
    Why are you so quick to define parameters for an attack helicopter?
    Not too long ago having a knob was a particular characteristic of being a man.
    Many a woman has a knob now


  • Options
    #5979
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Gervais08 wrote: »
    But I’m a woman, an adult human female - and the stereotypes are wrong. I’m not non-binary (that’s made up nonsense) - I’m just a girl who isn’t afraid to stick two fingers up to stereotypes and be myself.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHzOOQfhPFg

    :D

    But yeah that's the joke about labels like "non binary", they actually reinforce stereotypes, yet I'm quite sure most who would use that label are in oblivious if not aggressive denial about that, because it makes them feel like they fit in. That said the 20th century has been described as the "Century of the Self"*, but because of the old certainties waning and the rise of social media and the interwebs I would see the 21st century better described as the "Century of the Self Involved"






    *from a purely western view of course. The rest of the world has stayed much the same as far as old certainties go.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #5980
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Gervais08 wrote: »
    It’s the annoying ones that piss me off - one sort said “you old people judge me because you’ve never seen anyone like me”.

    No just Bowie, Marc Bolan, The Sweet, Steve Strange, Leigh Bowery, Adam Ant, the New Romantics etc etc etc - give it a rest you pointless attention seekers!!!!
    Actually I see another aspect to this G. Those you list were jumped on and followed by a majority adolescent fanbase, just like the hippies and beatniks who also shocked the adult world before them. Again for obvious reasons as adolescents have always looked for a way to navigate their course into an adult identity(and did so long before the word "Teenager" was invented).

    However the vast majority navigated that course and left that behind in happy nostalgia. Today more and more adolescence is extended and clung onto. I recall another thread ages ago discussing a woman writer and after reading her stuff it kinda floored me to find out she wasn't a teenager, but a woman in her thirties. Maybe because those old adult certainties are mostly missing and so growth can be stunted for many. Add in a world of communities that will enable and encourage staying in that extended adolescence and here we are where adult men and women will speak in self involved adolescent terms still looking for an identity. Someone saying they're non binary two spirits at 18 is one thing and fine and even expected, the same person saying that at 38? Not so much.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #5981
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    It is one thing, though, people identifying as something that supposedly makes them unique - goth, pagan, queer, punk, femme, non-binary, crustie, yogi - whatever, knock yourself out! and I don't even mind what age people are still clinging to their "special" identity, because it does not affect anyone else, but it is quite another thing when laws, regulations, language, medical ethics, biological facts are being ideologically manipulated to reflect utter falsehoods.
    The rubber hits the road, as a prime current example, when a young violent male who expresses uncontrollable desires to rape and murder women is installed into a locked institution from which imprisoned women cannot escape because of how the first person identifies. This is craziness. This is gone way beyond casual anthropological observation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5982
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    Gruffalux wrote: »
    It is one thing, though, people identifying as something that supposedly makes them unique - goth, pagan, queer, punk, femme, non-binary, crustie, yogi - whatever, knock yourself out! and I don't even mind what age people are still clinging to their "special" identity, because it does not affect anyone else, but it is quite another thing when laws, regulations, language, medical ethics, biological facts are being ideologically manipulated to reflect utter falsehoods.
    The rubber hits the road, as a prime current example, when a young violent male who expresses uncontrollable desires to rape and murder women is installed into a locked institution from which imprisoned women cannot escape because of how the first person identifies. This is craziness. This is gone way beyond casual anthropological observation.

    Men’s “rights” to be violent to women clearly trump women’s right to be safe.


  • Options
    #5983
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    Gervais08 wrote: »
    Men’s “rights” to be violent to women clearly trump women’s right to be safe.

    I honestly don't think it helps to make this a battle of the sexes issue. Men vs women. It is not a "feminist" issue. I actually hate that in my own pursuit of this issue I end up reading so much animus towards men from so many gender critical feminists. Really puts me off.

    It is in fact an issue regarding the subversion of reason. Which affects all people.

    After all one could equally say that along with some narcissistic misogynistic males there are some downright insane women who are ruining their boy children by subjecting them to social conditioning and later medical atrocities in pursuit of their own attention seeking neurosis or munchausens by proxy.

    But it is better not to concentrate on the people who stupidly swarm to embrace the ideology but rather to concentrate on the contradictions within the subversive ideology itself.


  • Options
    #5984
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    Gruffalux wrote: »
    I honestly don't think it helps to make this a battle of the sexes issue. Men vs women. It is not a "feminist" issue. I actually hate that in my own pursuit of this issue I end up reading so much animus towards men from so many gender critical feminists. Really puts me off.

    It is in fact an issue regarding the subversion of reason. Which affects all people.

    After all one could equally say that along with some narcissistic misogynistic males there are some downright insane women who are ruining their boy children by subjecting them to social conditioning and later medical atrocities in pursuit of their own attention seeking neurosis or munchausens by proxy.

    But it is better not to concentrate on the people who stupidly swarm to embrace the ideology but rather to concentrate on the contradictions within the subversive ideology itself.

    I never used to consider myself an out and out feminist but TRAs have started the war on women .


  • Options
    #5985
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Gervais08 wrote: »
    Men’s “rights” to be violent to women clearly trump women’s right to be safe.
    Well that's the thing G. In that case they're no longer a man. No way in hell would a male offender who had expressed uncontrollable desires to rape and kill women be let anywhere within an asses roar of a women's prison. He'd even be segregated in a men's prison because rapists and child abusers are considered the lowest of the low and the attitude of many male inmates towards a man like that would likely lead to threats and attacks. However, claim you're actually a woman and not a dangerously violent mentally ill man and...

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #5986
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Gruffalux wrote: »
    I honestly don't think it helps to make this a battle of the sexes issue. Men vs women. It is not a "feminist" issue. I actually hate that in my own pursuit of this issue I end up reading so much animus towards men from so many gender critical feminists. Really puts me off.
    This. It's best to leave the nuttier end of so called "feminism" to work on its own internal contradictions and divisive nonsense.
    After all one could equally say that along with some narcissistic misogynistic males there are some downright insane women who are ruining their boy children by subjecting them to social conditioning and later medical atrocities in pursuit of their own attention seeking neurosis or munchausens by proxy.
    Indeed. In too many cases it seems that those mothers you speak of are at the vanguard of this.
    But it is better not to concentrate on the people who stupidly swarm to embrace the ideology but rather to concentrate on the contradictions within the subversive ideology itself.

    It is in fact an issue regarding the subversion of reason. Which affects all people.
    So much this and it's even hijacked medicine, science and the law. That is not good at all. When someone can point at the law or medical science that defies reason on the altar of identity politics then that's bad science and bad law. There are enough truly stupid and truly dangerous outings in human history that did just that. We're not immune.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #5987
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Gruffalux wrote: »
    It is in fact an issue regarding the subversion of reason.
    This is it for me.

    Everything else from sports to lesbian fellatio is a sideshow.

    To quote Ronald Reagan; 'If you're explaining, you're losing.' - if you're lost in the mire of single sex spaces, you're already on the ropes. The whole thing is an absurdity long long before that.


  • Options
    #5988
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    y0ssar1an22 wrote: »
    what are the criteria these days? in all seriousness, can i ID as an attack helicopter? and if not, why not?

    Yes you can but bear in mind attack helicopters ,tanks and aircraft tend to get called she by its pilots , commanders unless you identify as a battleship which are sole called men /He (Men O War) Which could get you into trouble with the wrong crowd .

    Got to love an attack helicopter
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Options
    #5989
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    CtevenSrowder wrote: »
    Non binary is a load of attention seeking nonsense. It should not be confused with transsexualism which is an actual real issue.

    Its the modern equivalent of those girls in the early 00s who said they were bi sexual to get attention and outrage their conservative parents. Had no interest in women, just love attention.


  • Options
    #5990
    LLMMLL
    Registered Users Posts: 4,588 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    Gruffalux wrote: »
    Adult human females are not a subset of woman. They are the set. Cis cannot qualify or sub divide the indivisible ontological category of women. Or men. Or girls. Etc.

    If you are desperately looking for a denoter word to attach to me to politically signify me to others, logical will do, thanks. Put me on the list.

    No they are not the set as it excludes trans women.

    I wouldn’t use the word logical as you are displaying an opinion not logic.


  • Options
    #5991
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Its the modern equivalent of those girls in the early 00s who said they were bi sexual to get attention and outrage their conservative parents. Had no interest in women, just love attention.

    I know someone who described themselves as pansexual - because Miley Cyrus did.

    Wasn't happy when I pointed out that label was applied to Captain Jack from Doctor Who cos he’d **** men, women, aliens, fish, daleks - it wasn’t real!!!

    Completely attention seeking crap.

    Btw her “lesbian experience” was slow dancing on a hen do to that God awful Katy Perry drivel!!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5992
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭Effects


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Many a woman has a knob now

    And someday, maybe people can be attack helicopters, even if they don't have rotors or guns.


  • Options
    #5993
    speelunker22
    Registered Users Posts: 27 ✭speelunker22


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    Not when getting rid of the "unwanted moniker" is part of a PR campaign to prevent discussion.

    It's not that cis people have a problem with the word cis. TERFs have a problem with any word that describes them as a group. It's been repeatedly stated on this thread by TERFs that their issue with the word cis is that there shouldn't be a word to describe them as a subgroup of.women as they believe themselves to be the only group describable by the word "woman".

    ....
    But I'm not capitulating to their PR efforts to play the victim.

    Firstly, this "PR Campaign" - please do tell me who is organising, co-ordinating and paying for this supposed campaign. If you are going to bleat on about the paranoia of those who question your stance this surely is a fine example of a paranoid delusion - the idea that there is an organised campaign against trans-people. That's some real tinfoil hat stuff right there.

    Secondly - if the spectrum of human gender identity and sexuality is so broad and diverse why do you assume that those you describe as TERFS are a homogenous group with a defined and fixed ideology? Again it's just a highly simplistic method of divisive and juvenile name-calling that does little to advance understanding or dialogue.

    Ad finally you mention this anti-trans campaign that aims to prevent discussion but then you bandy about the word TERF in order to shut down discussion. Pot, kettle, black maybe?


  • Options
    #5994
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    No they are not the set as it excludes trans women.

    I wouldn’t use the word logical as you are displaying an opinion not logic.

    Trans woman are a subset of men.


  • Options
    #5995
    LLMMLL
    Registered Users Posts: 4,588 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    speelunker22 wrote: »
    Firstly, this "PR Campaign" - please do tell me who is organising, co-ordinating and paying for this supposed campaign. If you are going to bleat on about the paranoia of those who question your stance this surely is a fine example of a paranoid delusion - the idea that there is an organised campaign against trans-people. That's some real tinfoil hat stuff right there.

    Secondly - if the spectrum of human gender identity and sexuality is so broad and diverse why do you assume that those you describe as TERFS are a homogenous group with a defined and fixed ideology? Again it's just a highly simplistic method of divisive and juvenile name-calling that does little to advance understanding or dialogue.

    Ad finally you mention this anti-trans campaign that aims to prevent discussion but then you bandy about the word TERF in order to shut down discussion. Pot, kettle, black maybe?

    I never said it was organised. In fact a few pages ago I specifically said it wasn’t an organised campaign. Generally a few TERFs come up with a new tactic like claiming misogyny, pretending they are concerned about vulnerable young people, or in this case claim that every new piece of language used by TRAs are a slur. Other TERFs see the advantages of these nonsense claims and start making the claims themselves.

    Bit strange to compare TERFism to the spectrum of sexuality. Just because sexuality is diverse doesn’t mean that any ideology is diverse. Like all ideologies, there is a little diversity with TERFism. But it’s clear you all pretty much share the same core opinions.

    Obviously part of the TERF campaign is to project the “I’m just a concerned citizen” image as part of a PR tactic. They know the more they appear as an ideological group, the more it will harm assessment of their “concerns”. Pure PR.

    The word TERF doesn’t shut down discussion. It assists and promotes discussion. It describes someone who holds a set of opinions and allows me to refer to them without having to say “a pers on who believes .....” and list a bunch of opinions which frankly would be quite dull to write or read.


  • Options
    #5996
    LLMMLL
    Registered Users Posts: 4,588 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    MikeOxsgreen wrote: »
    Trans woman are a subset of men.

    No they are a subset of women.


  • Options
    #5997
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    MikeOxsgreen wrote: »
    Trans woman are a subset of men.

    And if they want to dress up and wear make up - grand, ask me to call them “she” and a girls name - again fine, that’s just respectful.

    Believe they are actually women and “lesbians” - **** right off.


  • Options
    #5998
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    No they are a subset of women.

    Not all trans women are the same.
    There will be sub sets within the group of individuals, distributed along the 'trans woman spectrum' , from early stage self-ID, to fully transitioned, and even individuals de-transitioning back.

    All men, of the set of men.

    Similarly, trans men are in the set of women.


  • Options
    #5999
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    No they are a subset of women.

    No not true at all ..

    This had been done to death to be a subset of women they have to be women in the first place ,
    They are men in men's body wearing womens clothing in some cases they don't but they are men "self identifying" to be women
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Options
    #6000
    LLMMLL
    Registered Users Posts: 4,588 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    Gatling wrote: »
    No not true at all ..

    This had been done to death to be a subset of women they have to be women in the first place ,
    They are men in men's body wearing womens clothing in some cases they don't but they are men "self identifying" to be women

    They are women in the first place. Any kind of transitioning doesn’t change that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6001
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    They are women in the first place. Any kind of transitioning doesn’t change that.

    Please open a biology test book - something for three year olds should be fine.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement