Jordan Peterson interview on C4

20Cent

Gynoid wrote: »

If something so simple becomes so stressful I would look to the level of neurosis in the individual.
People have been getting unisex haircuts for decades. People have been publicly non conforming appearance and behaviour wise for a very long time. Look at Luke Ming Flanagans election posters in the 1990s. Look at the New Romantic movement from rhe 70s on, thats 50 years ago for goodness sake. In the 80s in UCD there was a lovely chap who never wore anything else except his long velvet cloak, tights and lipstick. It is not a cause for any angst to get a gender non conforming hair cut. Or to be non conforming in any other way. That person's greatest problem is themselves.

The point seems to have gone over your head.
It's not the cut or style or whatnot it's knowing they will be asked their gender and the possibility of being refused.

Gynoid

20Cent wrote: »

The point seems to have gone over your head.
It's not the cut or style or whatnot it's knowing they will be asked their gender and the possibility of being refused.

Oh I give up ta fcuk.

Gynoid

Gynoid wrote: »

Oh I give up ta fcuk.

You gave it some go.. fair play to you..

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

Yes, some places only cut mens or womens hair so if your neither where to go?

If terms of where that person would be accepted, any barber shop, no bother.

nkl12xtw5goz70

20Cent wrote: »

The point seems to have gone over your head.
It's not the cut or style or whatnot it's knowing they will be asked their gender and the possibility of being refused.

No hair salon is going to ask someone to leave because they identify as nonbinary.

If the person isn't happy to state "male" or "female," then ask the stylist to base the price on the complexity of the cut desired.

20Cent

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

If terms of where that person would be accepted, any barber shop, no bother.

There was a court case in Dublin recently where a barbers refused to cut a transmans hair for the reason I stated above. It does happen.

20Cent

Kassidy Savory Tick wrote: »

No hair salon is going to ask someone to leave because they identify as nonbinary.

If the person isn't happy to state "male" or "female," then ask the stylist to base the price on the complexity of the cut desired.

Have much experience being nonbinary?
Maybe they would know more about this

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

There was a court case in Dublin recently where a barbers refused to cut a transmans hair for the reason I stated above. It does happen.

Well, the person in that video looks like a man. To me anyway.

One eyed Jack

20Cent wrote: »

Have much experience being nonbinary?
Maybe they would know more about this

I’d expect stylists or barbers to know more about cutting or styling hair than someone who is neither a barber nor a stylist. It’s easy for that person to say “cut the fcuking hair”, but when they expect someone else to do it, then they have to respect that person’s boundaries.

Of course if they imagine themselves to be above people they view as only existing to serve them, then they’re always going to have a horrible attitude towards other people, who don’t just exist to serve them.

Yanniv tried that craic and didn’t get very far with it, and there are a couple more people at it too, getting nowhere fast, only making themselves look like precious idiots -


https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/colorado-baker-jack-phillips-state-end-legal-fight-over-transgender-n979816

20Cent

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’d expect stylists or barbers to know more about cutting or styling hair than someone who is neither a barber nor a stylist. It’s easy for that person to say “cut the fcuking hair”, but when they expect someone else to do it, then they have to respect that person’s boundaries.

Of course if they imagine themselves to be above people they view as only existing to serve them, then they’re always going to have a horrible attitude towards other people, who don’t just exist to serve them.

You compared that person that an animal a few posts back so that's a bit rich. Surprised a freedom loving chap like yourself would be so against others just because they are a little different and don't fit in a box for convenience sake.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

LOL, ratioed.

One eyed Jack

20Cent wrote: »

You compared that person that an animal a few posts back so that's a bit rich. Surprised a freedom loving chap like yourself would be so against others just because they are a little different and don't fit in a box for convenience sake.

I think you may have me confused with someone else? I never compared anyone to an animal?

I’m not against anyone’s freedoms btw, I’m very supportive of people’s freedom, that includes people’s freedom from being compelled to do something they have no wish to do.

That’s not being against anyone for any reason, it’s saying that in just the same way as the complainant expects their boundaries to be respected, there is that same obligation on them to respect other people’s boundaries.

If someone is intellectually challenged, I think they could be forgiven in those circumstances for failing to understand the concept of social responsibility and acting in good faith towards others, but otherwise? No.

20Cent

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think you may have me confused with someone else? I never compared anyone to an animal?

I’m not against anyone’s freedoms btw, I’m very supportive of people’s freedom, that includes people’s freedom from being compelled to do something they have no wish to do.

That’s not being against anyone for any reason, it’s saying that in just the same way as the complainant expects their boundaries to be respected, there is that same obligation on them to respect other people’s boundaries.

If someone is intellectually challenged, I think they could be forgiven in those circumstances for failing to understand the concept of social responsibility and acting in good faith towards others, but otherwise? No.

Mixed u up with permabear apologies.

Your ok with bigotry then, at least you are honest.

One eyed Jack

20Cent wrote: »

Mixed u up with permabear apologies.

Your ok with bigotry then, at least you are honest.

You’re mixing me up with someone else again who said they were fine with bigotry, because I certainly didn’t say that.

20Cent

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You’re mixing me up with someone else again who said they were fine with bigotry, because I certainly didn’t say that.

Your said you are ok with someone refusing to serve someone due to "boundaries". People shouldn't be compelled to do something they don't wish to do. Serve food to a black person etc .

One eyed Jack

20Cent wrote: »

Your said you are ok with someone refusing to serve someone due to "boundaries". People shouldn't be compelled to do something they don't wish to do. Serve food to a black person etc .

Be putting words in my mouth now at all. I said there was an obligation on everyone in society to respect other people’s boundaries in the same way as they expect their boundaries to be respected. No need for the inverted commas around the word boundaries. I also said that if someone is intellectually challenged I could be forgiving in those circumstances where they may not understand the concept of social responsibility and acting in good faith towards other people.

You appear to have inferred from that something which is entirely different to what I said, but it’s one of the fundamental articles of the UN Declaration of Human Rights -

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Unless you’re under the impression that some people you favour should be exempt from their obligations towards others? You’re not going to get very far with that idea, but as I actually did say - I can be forgiving in circumstances where a person is intellectually challenged, as they may not have the capacity to understand concepts such as dignity, empathy, respect and so on.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

Even simple things like going for a piss and getting a haircut are difficult.
A more understanding welcoming society is desirable.

‘Cept when it comes to understanding why many women want to preserve spaces for biological females or protect women’s sports, amiright?

20Cent

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

‘Cept when it comes to understanding why many women want to preserve spaces for biological females or protect women’s sports, amiright?

If it means excluding others than no I'm not for that.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

If it means excluding others than no I'm not for that.

Well then you are picking and choosing who to be understanding towards.

20Cent

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well then you are picking and choosing who to be understanding towards.

If someones issue is they want to exclude others then yes they shouldn't be accommodated.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

If someones issue is they want to exclude others then yes they shouldn't be accommodated.

Lol, I know, silly broads.

20Cent

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Lol, I know, silly broads.

The vast majority of women have no problems sharing spaces with transwomen.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

The vast majority of women have no problems sharing spaces with transwomen.

Source?

And tbh even if only, say, 30% of women object, that would be a lot of women.

20Cent

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Source?

And tbh even if only, say, 30% of women object, that would be a lot of women.

If 30% of women objected to black women using the facilities should they be accommodated?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

If 30% of women objected to black women using the facilities should they be accommodated?

Man, black people must get utterly fed up as being used as examples.

Are all the black people at a significant physical advantage to all the white people? Do you understand why people are objecting?

But that you had to resort to that...

20Cent

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Man, black people must get utterly fed up as being used as examples.

Are all the black people at a significant physical advantage to all the white people? Do you understand why people are objecting?

But that you had to resort to that...

It's a fair analogy.
Some people feel uncomfortable around people or different races.
Should we accommodate them?

Same as with trans people.

coffee_cake

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Man, black people must get utterly fed up as being used as examples.

they do
so are intersex people

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

It's a fair analogy.
Some people feel uncomfortable around people or different races.
Should we accommodate them?

Same as with trans people.

One is based on skin deep differences, the other on significant biological differences. It’s not a good comparison at all.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

bluewolf wrote: »

they do
so are intersex people

Right? Being intersex can’t be changed anymore than other karyotypes so I don’t know why they get lumped in with people who feel they were born the wrong sex. And intersex people generally phenotypically look either male or female. Do they feel male or female? I don’t know, I haven’t watched or read many accounts of being intersex.

coffee_cake

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Right? Being intersex can’t be changed anymore than other karyotypes so I don’t know why they get lumped in with people who feel they were born the wrong sex. And intersex people generally phenotypically look either male or female. Do they feel male or female? I don’t know, I haven’t watched or read many accounts of being intersex.

it's also funny to bring up race considering how much abuse rachel dolezal got for identifying as black

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/16/transracial-definition-destructive-rachel-dolezal-spokane-naacp