Peak Trans

Annasopra

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

In your opinion it is prickish. You take the moral hugh ground. Pour out compassion so everyone else can’t make a point because we are all pricks.

In Wibbs opinion.

HappyAsLarE

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

In Wibbs opinion.

In a hypotethical siutiiation of him being face to face with the customer.

Wibbs

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I'm glad you acknowledge deliberate misgendering is essentially being a prick.

No, it's unmannerly. Maybe you aren't quite up to speed with the difference. Society may decide to circumscribe how I may act, and that's fine, but I take a dim view when the same society - and a small minority at that - decide how I should think.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

In Wibbs opinion.

You ---- country mile ---- point. But, hey whatever floats your particular boat.

MadYaker

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

Apparently he had an agreement with a sister hair dressers not to give women cheap haircuts as it would take business off them.

Not to give women cheap haircuts or not to give women haircuts at all? Bottom line to me seems to be that since it’s illegal to refuse to provide a person with a service because they are a certain gender he should have done his job, regardless of any bullish!t gender issue. Agreements like that between businesses are asking for trouble. I’d be skeptical that they had anything in the business lease that says they can’t cut women’s hair as I’m fairly sure that wouldn’t be legal. The barber in question was quite capable of providing the requested haircut so he should have just got on with it. How dumb do you have to be in this day and age to refuse to serve someone because of their gender?

P_1

Have to say the agreement the barbers had with the hairdressers is most odd. Surely that also must breach several anti discrimination and anti competition laws.

As an aside, Dublin is having a Trans Pride March on Saturday. I'm not gonna lie, I am wondering what sort of a reaction that is going to get both on the streets and online.

AllForIt

I think the fine was a bit much. 5K is a lot of haircuts.

Calhoun

P_1 wrote: »

Have to say the agreement the barbers had with the hairdressers is most odd. Surely that also must breach several anti discrimination and anti competition laws.

As an aside, Dublin is having a Trans Pride March on Saturday. I'm not gonna lie, I am wondering what sort of a reaction that is going to get both on the streets and online.

Apparently the agreement is something done when both service providers have the same landlord. If both are competing with each other one may go out of business and landlord looses rental income.

It will be interesting alright, i would have thought that it would be covered by pride. One of the things that will determine the reaction is the policy changes they are pushing for it.

pleas advice

AllForIt wrote: »

I think the fine was a bit much. 5K is a lot of haircuts.

especially to a barber...

pleas advice

P_1 wrote: »

As an aside, Dublin is having a Trans Pride March on Saturday. I'm not gonna lie, I am wondering what sort of a reaction that is going to get both on the streets and online.

I'd be interested to know how many actual trans people attend, as opposed to LGBT..., genderqueer, allies, etc.

FurBabyMomma

So basically this post started off with most people saying "I don't care what consenting adults do, but leave the children out of it" and has now come full circle to "I don't care what consenting adults do, I get to decide their gender for them based on how I perceive their masculinity/femininity."

An_Toirpin

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

because men and women are looking for a different service.

In general, sure. But there are exceptions. Plenty of men have long hair that might need more care, and plenty of women have shorter hair that might just need a quick trim, and that's before even mentioning trans people. It makes sense as a general rule, but it seems a bit daft to actually refuse a customer over it.

You are acting as if it is black and white. Plenty of women cut mens hair all the time, other men prefer to go to a traditional barber as female hairdressers often over rely on sissors and because of the atmosphere in barbers. It is their right too. The real issue is can a person with boobs and a vagina expect to be treated as a man. Of course such people deserve compassion and respect but they are not men. 
This absurd issue has to be highlighted. Please could a trans woman with a penis and stubble eho is jacked apply as a female under the TD party gender nomination system.

An_Toirpin

urBabyMomma wrote: »

So basically this post started off with most people saying "I don't care what consenting adults do, but leave the children out of it" and has now come full circle to "I don't care what consenting adults do, I get to decide their gender for them based on how I perceive their masculinity/femininity."

Some ones identiy  is a contract with society at large. If this person had transtioned it literally would have never been an issue.
Youre also conflating thegender and sex, understandably as its very contradictory.

The Bishop Basher

FurBabyMomma wrote: »

So basically this post started off with most people saying "I don't care what consenting adults do, but leave the children out of it" and has now come full circle to "I don't care what consenting adults do, I get to decide their gender for them based on how I perceive their masculinity/femininity."

Well there was a lot of discussion in the middle...

But when people on this side of the Atlantic are now getting sued and fined for failing to recognise a woman as a man despite the fact that he’s a biological woman, then we have clearly got to a bit of an impasse..

whisky_galore

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

How the hell would the barber know that?

He made a perfectly reasonable assumption that she is a woman, which she is. Like it or not.

And it cost the barber 5k. Its lunacy.

When asked about redress at the hearing, Mr McLoughlin responded that the case ‘was not about money’.

Didn't leave the money after him/her/whatever though... nice payout for a bit of offence.

Kivaro

whisky_galore wrote: »

When asked about redress at the hearing, Mr McLoughlin responded that the case ‘was not about money’.

Didn't leave the money after him/her/whatever though... nice payout for a bit of offence.

That's what I thought after reading the story.

Why not donate the money then to a good cause?
The story has a tinge of the gay cake incident in the North, and seems to be a bit of a setup. McLoughlin couldn't wait to see his/her/whatever solicitor after the event.

For a very small minority in the country, we certainly do hear a lot about trans offence lately ...... even with all the other offence that's going on.

Malayalam

Joe Rogan talks to Debra Soh and the first half hour of podcast is regarding trans children and gender ideology in particular. Soh is very sex positive and accepting but she has serious issues with children being transitioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zere8WRepGo

This extract deals with the advantages the Y chromosome gives in contact sports, and the difficulties for girls in sports when it is insisted that there is no difference...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQpQmNhya14

To Fur Baby Momma, I am concerned only regarding minors in this case. The whole gender queer and trans adult scene and activism is completely outside my arena of interest. It's a whole other topic.

P_1

pleas advice wrote: »

I'd be interested to know how many actual trans people attend, as opposed to LGBT..., genderqueer, allies, etc.

Tbf it is a large umbrella. Like not everyone identifies as trans and not everyone identifies a the gender they were born as. Quite a few people identify within the large spectrum between the two

_Kaiser_

I can't fault the barber here. He seemed genuinely confused by the situation and felt obliged to honour the agreement with the ladies hairdresser - can't see anything wrong with that.

McLoughlin looks like a woman, barber took her as such. Again, nothing wrong with that.

There was no deliberate malice or "transphobia"/discrimination here. The barber (likely the first time he's encountered such a situation) reacted the way most people would IMO in such a situation. The real issue is that he had to pay 5k for a genuine misunderstanding and McLoughlin's hurt feelings.

Not surprised at the verdict though given Ireland Inc's obsession with being on the bleeding edge of social trends/justice and virtue-signalling long before it became a term (the Irish "need" to be liked/approved of)

Roger_007

P_1 wrote: »

?.................

As an aside, Dublin is having a Trans Pride March on Saturday. I'm not gonna lie, I am wondering what sort of a reaction that is going to get both on the streets and online.

Will there now be separate marches for each of the groups on the LGBTIQ spectrum?

(As a matter of interest, when will the Hetrosexual Pride March take place?)

whisky_galore

Wonder how this issue would go down with men-only golf clubs and ladies-only gyms?

PlaneSpeeking

Many decades ago (like early 1800s), legend has it that my 3 x great grandfather had a bit of a wedge to give away.

He put it in a will or document that said "it goes to my eldest son".

He never had sons, only my great great nan. The money was lost.

Like I said, loooong time ago and could easily be bo**ocks but what would stop her saying "I identify today as a man" - getting the cash and going back to crinolines and the vapours the next day ???

Give that there are still titles etc that pass to male heirs, could a younger sister declare as a man - given nowadays all you need is to say "I'm a man" and you are to some people. No changing of appearance needed - just a few words - and take a title ?

PlaneSpeeking

Roger_007 wrote: »

Will there now be separate marches for each of the groups on the LGBTIQ spectrum?

(As a matter of interest, when will the Hetrosexual Pride March take place?)

Think of it as the gay couple down the road, they have to have a fire engine permanently stationed outside the house in case of arson.

You do not.

Because you don't have this, you're not missing in anything - just be glad you don't need it!

Same with Pride. No one's ever been beaten up, sacked or murdered for being straight.

PlaneSpeeking

whisky_galore wrote: »

Wonder how this issue would go down with men-only golf clubs and ladies-only gyms?

The former are "evil places of toxic masculinity" and the latter are "spaces where women can freely express themselves without the judgment of men".

Or so I was told!!!

Wibbs

P_1 wrote: »

Quite a few people identify within the large spectrum between the two

TBH this stuff does my head in with its ever increasing set of meaningless personalised labels. Facebook has over 50 options for gender. And it's all self indulgent identity politics ballsology.

For me there are three genders: Male, Female, Intersex. Three sexualities: Heterosexual, Homosexual, Bisexual*. Now an individual might want to feel they fit into a particular subjective self described label, but objectively they will fit into those definitions above. Don't feel you fit into such narrow boxes? Fine, but you do.








*Asexual another possibility, though folks who are asexual tend to fall into the above three existing sexualities and genders, even when they don't want to act on it. I also leave out those sexually attracted to children or animals or objects. They're mental dysfunctions.

Neyite

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Give that there are still titles etc that pass to male heirs, could a younger sister declare as a man - given nowadays all you need is to say "I'm a man" and you are to some people. No changing of appearance needed - just a few words - and take a title ?

Well we don't have titles in this country.

In the UK where they do have titles, the proposed legislation will allow anyone to self identify as they like, when they like, be that part time or full time. However they drew the line at primogeniture. So the powers that be have decided that you can, to all intents and purposes identify as the opposite sex to the extent that you don't need to have had any surgeries or hormone treatment, and legally you must be treated accordingly, and that it's even illegal to ask or imply that they are anything other than the gender they state.

Except when it comes to inheriting your Da's title and all that goes with it.

PlaneSpeeking

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH this stuff does my head in with its ever increasing set of meaningless personalised labels. Facebook has over 50 options for gender. And it's all self indulgent identity politics ballsology.

For me there are three genders: Male, Female, Intersex. Three sexualities: Heterosexual, Homosexual, Bisexual*. Now an individual might want to feel they fit into a particular subjective self described label, but objectively they will fit into those definitions above. Don't feel you fit into such narrow boxes? Fine, but you do.

*Asexual another possibility, though folks who are asexual tend to fall into the above three existing sexualities and genders, even when they don't want to act on it. I also leave out those sexually attracted to children or animals or objects. They're mental dysfunctions.

Oh would you stop..... commenting exactly what I was going to!!!!

50 ?? Seriously ?? ** Google ** https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-each-of-facebooks-51-new-gender-options-means

Oh sweet Jesus, that is going down the rabbit hole; dropping acid; and then lying there for days.

I can't even finish reading that list, it's too depressing.

I am a staunch gay ally, I love that community - I have marched in Pride in different cities, I'll go to bat for them.

Every normal person would fight for the right for a man or woman to love and marry and have children with whoever he or she wants.

If a genetic mistake has been made and your physical appearance does not match what it going on inside - I would be your champion.

But I have seen the physical and mental struggle that a male to female transsexual went through, she fought against family and culture to have her surgery. And I believe she is a better person for that. She's a woman, she always has been - science just failed her in the womb and science fixed it.

51 genders ? I give up.

PlaneSpeeking

Neyite wrote: »

Well we don't have titles in this country.

In the UK where they do have titles, the proposed legislation will allow anyone to self identify as they like, when they like, be that part time or full time. However they drew the line at primogeniture. So the powers that be have decided that you can, to all intents and purposes identify as the opposite sex to the extent that you don't need to have had any surgeries or hormone treatment, and legally you must be treated accordingly, and that it's even illegal to ask or imply that they are anything other than the gender they state.

Except when it comes to inheriting your Da's title and all that goes with it.

That's actual fair enough, cheers!

_Kaiser_

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH this stuff does my head in with its ever increasing set of meaningless personalised labels. Facebook has over 50 options for gender. And it's all self indulgent identity politics ballsology.

For me there are three genders: Male, Female, Intersex. Three sexualities: Heterosexual, Homosexual, Bisexual*. Now an individual might want to feel they fit into a particular subjective self described label, but objectively they will fit into those definitions above. Don't feel you fit into such narrow boxes? Fine, but you do.








*Asexual another possibility, though folks who are asexual tend to fall into the above three existing sexualities and genders, even when they don't want to act on it. I also leave out those sexually attracted to children or animals or objects. They're mental dysfunctions.

Ahhh, common sense and logic! Something sorely lacking from the most vocal on these kind of subjects where (hurt) feelings would overrule such notions of biology, science, precedent, accepted norms and the aforementioned level-headed common sense.

It was one thing though when this sort of stuff was confined to the inanity of social media, but quite another if we have real people in Ireland (as David Bowie sang, "this is not America") being sued for someone's hurt feelings.

That's a dangerous slide and not something to be encouraged IMO. The "liberal West" is consuming itself (literally) with such notions lately, and the only reason I can see for it being allowed to become mainstream thought is as a distraction from some of the far more serious issues facing our countries in recent years.

Neyite

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

That's actual fair enough, cheers!

If you are a trans man and your dad has a title it would be pretty unfair!

It highlights a glaring double standard with the legislation though.

_Kaiser_

Neyite wrote: »

If you are a trans man and your dad has a title it would be pretty unfair!

It highlights a glaring double standard with the legislation though.

No it doesn't... it highlights the fact that the legislation was written in a different time and not updated for the current crusade to redefine everything that has characterised the last 10-15 years.

I'm sure it'll happen when and if the demand/need is there.

PlaneSpeeking

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Think of it as the gay couple down the road, they have to have a fire engine permanently stationed outside the house in case of arson.

You do not.

what are their names

youd have thought we'd have heard of the couple with their own personal fire engine service.

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

what are their names

youd have thought we'd have heard of the couple with their own personal fire engine service.

[EMAIL="https://www.dictionary.com/browse/analogy"]https://www.dictionary.com/browse/analogy[/EMAIL]

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

P_1

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH this stuff does my head in with its ever increasing set of meaningless personalised labels. Facebook has over 50 options for gender. And it's all self indulgent identity politics ballsology.

For me there are three genders: Male, Female, Intersex. Three sexualities: Heterosexual, Homosexual, Bisexual*. Now an individual might want to feel they fit into a particular subjective self described label, but objectively they will fit into those definitions above. Don't feel you fit into such narrow boxes? Fine, but you do.








*Asexual another possibility, though folks who are asexual tend to fall into the above three existing sexualities and genders, even when they don't want to act on it. I also leave out those sexually attracted to children or animals or objects. They're mental dysfunctions.

I'll type up a proper reply to this when I'm home from work.

I'm interested in hearing where you derived this from as usually were fairly in line with most social issues and theres a bit of a divide here

PlaneSpeeking

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

[EMAIL="https://www.dictionary.com/browse/analogy"]https://www.dictionary.com/browse/analogy[/EMAIL]

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

ahhh

thought not

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

ahhh

thought not

Oh sweet Jesus - seriously Google that link. In fact, buy a dictionary and read it.

You're seriously asking for a SOURCE for an analogy ????

https://www.nme.com/blogs/nme-blogs/straight-pride-mocking-2099661

Some posters really do not get - well, anything.

FurBabyMomma

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Some ones identiy  is a contract with society at large. If this person had transtioned it literally would have never been an issue.
Youre also conflating thegender and sex, understandably as its very contradictory.

First of all, this person had actually begun transitioning by beginning hormone treatment before this incident. I genuinely don't get your point regardless - at what point during the process to transition would this not have been an issue, in your opinion?

Secondly, I'm not conflating gender and sex. I made no reference to biological sex, but to gender as an aspect of social construct (looking/acting male of female in line with societal norms). If someone tells you they perceive their gender as male, and therefore want a male-looking haircut, how is it up to anyone to say, well you look female to me and on that basis I'm refusing to give you the haircut you want and are prepared to pay for? That must be so distressing to the person involved and it seems like it could so easily have been avoided.

I'm not saying that everything regarding transgenderism is black and white or straightforward, but are we really going to deny people who are transgender any sort of autonomy at every turn? Over something as simple as a haircut? It must be tremendously difficult to be transgender and navigate the world if this is the reaction.

PlaneSpeeking

FurBabyMomma wrote: »

First of all, this person had actually begun transitioning by beginning hormone treatment before this incident. I genuinely don't get your point regardless - at what point during the process to transition would this not have been an issue, in your opinion?

Secondly, I'm not conflating gender and sex. I made no reference to biological sex, but to gender as an aspect of social construct (looking/acting male of female in line with societal norms). If someone tells you they perceive their gender as male, and therefore want a male-looking haircut, how is it up to anyone to say, well you look female to me and on that basis I'm refusing to give you the haircut you want and are prepared to pay for? That must be so distressing to the person involved and it seems like it could so easily have been avoided.

I'm not saying that everything regarding transgenderism is black and white or straightforward, but are we really going to deny people who are transgender any sort of autonomy at every turn? Over something as simple as a haircut? It must be tremendously difficult to be transgender and navigate the world if this is the reaction.

This.

I'm not girly. I last wore a skirt at 16, 32 years ago because it was school uniform - and I had no choice.

I've been described as "butch" in the past.

Yet, I'm female. I refuse to change who I was born because society has in the past had limited parameters on male and female.

Weaker folk however decide that they don't want to hold the line and stand up for themselves - and therefore create 50 genders so they can "fit in".

I don't fit in - I'm not a typical woman, but a woman i am and I don't care about stereotypes.

FurBabyMomma

FurBabyMomma wrote:

So basically this post started off with most people saying "I don't care what consenting adults do, but leave the children out of it" and has now come full circle to "I don't care what consenting adults do, I get to decide their gender for them based on how I perceive their masculinity/femininity."

I read it differently. It started with people saying "if an adult wants to alter their body, fully aware of the consequences and being mature enough to do so, fine. But don't allow kids to make decisions that will change their lives irreparably".

And has now become:

"If an adult wants to alter their body, fine but don't force me to ignore biology and common sense in order to spare your feelings".

I don't think anyone here has a problem with trans people but I do have a problem with being told what to think. I have encountered trans people in my day to day life and used pronouns that they preferred to be called because they treated me well and were respectful to me.

Telling someone they MUST use certain words or else be labelled a bigot is disrespectful and more damaging to the possibility of normalizing trans people to society.

_Kaiser_

P_1 wrote: »

I'll type up a proper reply to this when I'm home from work.

I'm interested in hearing where you derived this from as usually were fairly in line with most social issues and theres a bit of a divide here

Personally I don't consider the witterings of primarily American college students on Twitter/Facebook as a valid barometer of where Irish society should be.

Despite the superficial similarities, the USA is a very different country than Ireland or others in the West with deep social, economic and racial divisions going back decades and indeed generations.

The late-80s onwards saw America turn in on itself socially with the need to define and explain/justify every behaviour, and this has been accelerated and spread with the rise of first satellite TV and then the Internet and particularly social media.

But these ideas (formed from the very different but real social issues experienced in that country) cannot be just copy/pasted onto other societies elsewhere, and that is why we're seeing an increasing push back from those who refuse to buy in to some of the more radical/bizarre/outlandish notions that are being pushed towards normalisation by the left.

If we're not careful, we will indeed end up like the USA - with the same deep divisions and cultural clashes that they've struggled with since the country was formed.

P_1

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Personally I don't consider the witterings of primarily American college students on Twitter/Facebook as a valid barometer of where Irish society should be.

Despite the superficial similarities, the USA is a very different country than Ireland or others in the West with deep social, economic and racial divisions going back decades and indeed generations.

The late-80s onwards saw America turn in on itself socially with the need to define and explain/justify every behaviour, and this has been accelerated and spread with the rise of first satellite TV and then the Internet and particularly social media.

But these ideas (formed from the very different but real social issues experienced in that country) cannot be just copy/pasted onto other societies elsewhere, and that is why we're seeing an increasing push back from those who refuse to buy in to some of the more radical/bizarre/outlandish notions that are being pushed towards normalisation by the left.

If we're not careful, we will indeed end up like the USA - with the same deep divisions and cultural clashes that they've struggled with since the country was formed.

And nor do I. Hence why I will be putting a proper reply, from an irish perspective together when I have access to a keyboard

The Bishop Basher

FurBabyMomma wrote: »

If someone tells you they perceive their gender as male, and therefore want a male-looking haircut, how is it up to anyone to say, well you look female to me and on that basis I'm refusing to give you the haircut you want and are prepared to pay for?

Because as has already been explained, this shop has a policy on only cutting male hair.

This customer didn’t just look female, they were female.

The Barber was new and trying to do the right thing and correctly deduced that this customer was a woman.

it ended up costing them €5k.

How is that fair on the barber ?

PlaneSpeeking

Rennaws wrote: »

Because as has already been explained, this shop has a policy on only cutting male hair.

This customer didn’t just look female, they were female.

The Barber was new and trying to do the right thing and correctly deduced that this customer was a woman.

it ended up costing them €5k.

How is that fair in the barber ?

It's not.

P_1

Rennaws wrote: »

Because as has already been explained, this shop has a policy on only cutting male hair.

This customer didn’t just look female, they were female.

The Barber was new and trying to do the right thing and correctly deduced that this customer was a woman.

it ended up costing them €5k.

How is that fair on the barber ?

If anything in this case it should be the landlord who pays the fine here for having such an asinine and anti competitive clause in the leases of both premises

Malayalam

Neyite wrote: »

Well we don't have titles in this country.

In the UK where they do have titles, the proposed legislation will allow anyone to self identify as they like, when they like, be that part time or full time. However they drew the line at primogeniture. So the powers that be have decided that you can, to all intents and purposes identify as the opposite sex to the extent that you don't need to have had any surgeries or hormone treatment, and legally you must be treated accordingly, and that it's even illegal to ask or imply that they are anything other than the gender they state.

Except when it comes to inheriting your Da's title and all that goes with it.

Some might laugh at the example regarding primogeniture laws but it is quite good for demonstrating the contradictions inherent in gender ideology and how it is becoming enshrined in legislation, education and social policy. If law protects gender as a social construct in one area it MUST protect it as a social construct in all areas or else the legislature and legislation as a device is wholly undermined. Something we do at our peril.


People might think oh what harm in the gender unicorn at school but when extrapolated to its logical conclusion the result is transgender identified police persons with birth genitalia intact permitted under UK police guidelines to intimately search people of the gender with which they identify. For example.

(Look it up).

There are going to be so many areas of pushback where people just say No, and then public policy makers are going to either have to reach for extravagant enforcement measures or wake up one day and realize wtf were we thinking.

Rory28

The barber should have just cut the hair. My hoop the barber didn't know trans issues would pass whatever contract he had with the hairdressers. Like most in this thread I would be against transitioning kids or early teenagers but this was an adult. I dont see why they couldnt just cut his hair. You dont have to respect them but you should at least have manners when talking to someone.

Live and let live stops when we stop people using services in their own community.

Wibbs

P_1 wrote: »

I'll type up a proper reply to this when I'm home from work.

I'm interested in hearing where you derived this from as usually were fairly in line with most social issues and theres a bit of a divide here

Because P it's based on simple logic and it fits any individual you care to mention and any gender and sexuality label out there, including every one of the labels Facebook reckons are valid.

I found said list and here it is in all its glory...

Agender
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
FTM
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Genderqueer
Intersex
Male to Female
MTF
Neither
Neutrois
Non-binary
Other
Pangender
Trans
Trans*
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transfeminine
Transgender
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transmasculine
Transsexual
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman
Two-Spirit

And believe me this isn't the most daft list by any stretch, there are dafter. For a start any label above that includes "trans" is the same bloody thing and fits into my intersex category. The ones containing "CIS" are also the same. Labels like "Agender" Neither, Neutrois, Two-Spirit, Bi-gender, Non-binary, Other, Pangender are nebulous at best, self indulgent identity politics at worst and again the individual will fit into either male, female or intersex. Androgyne and Androgynous again the same thing and again self identitifying and cultural with it(what one culture defines as androgynous differs from what another might).

PlaneSpeeking

Wibbs wrote: »

Because P it's based on simple logic and it fits any individual you care to mention and any gender and sexuality label out there, including every one of the labels Facebook reckons are valid.

I found said list and here it is in all its glory...

Agender
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
FTM
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Genderqueer
Intersex
Male to Female
MTF
Neither
Neutrois
Non-binary
Other
Pangender
Trans
Trans*
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transfeminine
Transgender
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transmasculine
Transsexual
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman
Two-Spirit

And believe me this isn't the most daft list by any stretch, there are dafter. For a start any label above that includes "trans" is the same bloody thing and fits into my intersex category. The ones containing "CIS" are also the same. Labels like "Agender" Neither, Neutrois, Two-Spirit, Bi-gender, Non-binary, Other, Pangender are nebulous at best, self indulgent identity politics at worst and again the individual will fit into either male, female or intersex. Androgyne and Androgynous again the same thing and again self identitifying and cultural with it(what one culture defines as androgynous differs from what another might).

Aren't a bunch of them identical ? Bold as an example.

I've just offended someone there probably.

Rory28

Malayalam wrote: »

It might get trickier in other gender centric services like massage, sex work, waxing, whatever. Like recently I have seen a heated debate regarding transgirls periods....it's gonna be tough on gynaecologists when they start refusing to rummage past girldick to inspect the period producing organs...

That never even crossed my mind. I don't know what way I'd fall on that tbh.

Rory28

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Aren't a bunch of them identical ? Bold as an example.

I've just offended someone there probably.

It would be risky to assume that

MadYaker

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I can't fault the barber here. He seemed genuinely confused by the situation and felt obliged to honour the agreement with the ladies hairdresser - can't see anything wrong with that.

McLoughlin looks like a woman, barber took her as such. Again, nothing wrong with that.

Nope. If this agreement did indeed exist it wasn’t legal. Regardless of what your views on the transgender issue are ( I don’t really understand it) what happened here was a barber refused to serve a customer because of their gender and that is discrimination plain and simple.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

There was no deliberate malice or "transphobia"/discrimination here. The barber (likely the first time he's encountered such a situation) reacted the way most people would IMO in such a situation. The real issue is that he had to pay 5k for a genuine misunderstanding and McLoughlin's hurt feelings.

The barber refused to serve this person because they were a women. How is that not discrimination in your book? He was perfectly capable of providing the requested haircut.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Not surprised at the verdict though given Ireland Inc's obsession with being on the bleeding edge of social trends/justice and virtue-signalling long before it became a term (the Irish "need" to be liked/approved of)