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

Gruffalux

excludedbin wrote: »

Life is, quite honestly, not long enough to waste any of it watching any of Joe Rogan's videos. Also I don't feel a journalist who wrote an entire book about how trans people are bad isn't someone worth listening to, no more than, say, Fred Phelps is worth listening to for his opinions on gay people.

Please do ignore the fact that like 'alt-right', the term 'terf' was coined by a self-described terf. They've just somehow managed to weaponise it by claiming it's now a slur. Oh and of course we get 'radical activists' because, y'know, if you think people who harass anyone that likes pizza or spends their time telling people who like pizza that they're wrong and mentally ill, that makes you a 'pizza radical activist', in the warped minds of terfs. And of course it's easy to claim most trans "activists" are 'men' when you pointedly refuse to acknowledge the existence of trans men. Just more fuel for the "it's all misogyny" fire, of course, rather than terfs just acknowledging that they're hateful creeps.

Personally, I think anyone that desperately hunts for whatever meagre handful of medical experts (or mere journalists) they can find who disagree with the established consensus with regards proper treatment for youths are the ones doing harm. So blinded by ideology, you'd condemn them to misery rather than admit you're wrong. Like the loonies who advocate for 'conversion therapy' for LGB children, you're happy to force whatever quackery you've made up on them rather than accept the truth.

Funny, as well, how ye lot only ever mention the tiny, tiny percentage of detransitioners rather than the vast majority who're happy with it.

Do note, however, that 'cis' is a Latin prefix that just means 'on the same side'. It's used in chemistry so I'm sure we'll be treated to more ravings about how chemists use slurs, now.

Not sure what my sex has to do with anything I've said, though, perhaps you should try judging what I've said on its own merits rather than rushing to your own prejudices. Or are you slyly insinuating I'm trans and, as such, my opinion can safely be discarded?

I am not being sly. It never crossed my mind you might be transgender, nor would I care.
As for judging what you say on its merits all I see are sneers, contempt and name calling, albeit eloquent, and I will not be bothering my hole with such.

excludedbin

Big words from someone that trades in sneers, contempt, and name calling, themselves. Do what you want, nothing I say or do will change your mind anyway.

Gruffalux

excludedbin wrote: »

Big words from someone that trades in sneers, contempt, and name calling, themselves. Do what you want, nothing I say or do will change your mind anyway.

You refer in a single post to "the warped minds of terfs", terfs as "hateful creeps", "loonies" who "force quackery" upon others.
You are a name caller, sir. That is all.

excludedbin

Shall I go through your post history for the many, many, many instances of 'trans radical activists', about 'progressives swallowing ideology', how it's 'a cult', talking about how it's 'autogynephila'? Pluck the log from your own eye first, thou hypocrite. Insults and name calling are fair game for you, don't get stroppy when you get a taste of your own medicine.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalox wrote: »

You refer in a single post to "the warped minds of terfs", terfs as "hateful creeps", "loonies" who "force quackery" upon others.
You are a name caller, sir. That is all.

Imagine material reality being considered quackery? :eek:

Gruffalux

excludedbin wrote: »

Shall I go through your post history for the many, many, many instances of 'trans radical activists', about 'progressives swallowing ideology', how it's 'a cult', talking about how it's 'autogynephila'? Pluck the log from your own eye first, thou hypocrite. Insults and name calling are fair game for you, don't get stroppy when you get a taste of your own medicine.

All of those words are accurate descriptions. Trans refers to transgender
Radical refers to the extreme ideas espoused.
Activist is someone who engages in activism on behalf of a goal or idea
Progressives is a word being commonly used to describe hyper leftism whereby change at all costs is embraced as opposed to conservation. I think it is a silly word myself due to its inaccuracy but progressives use it.
Ideology means a system that promotes specific ideas or theories.
Cult is a system of beliefs or an organisation that demands adherence or else be cast out.
Autogynephilia is a classification of 60 to 80% of transgender males to females described by Ray Blanchard who has spent decades in close study of trans people and is among the first senior psychologists to recommend Sex Reassignment Surgery as a salve for persistent dysphoria.

Now your turn -
Hateful
Creep
Loonies
Forced quackery
Warped minds

Gruffalux

Oooh and hypocrite...

excludedbin

Gruffalox wrote: »

All of those words are accurate descriptions.

Well then all of mine are accurate descriptions, too. I seem to recall you even used 'creep' on the thread about O'Gorman.

Gruffalox wrote: »

Sara was not just in the same room as him.

And yeah, I think he is a creep. I would not share a platform with him. Or anyone I think is that kind of a real creep, no matter if I shared different aims with them. Just would not be able to get past their previous.

Sauce for the goose, my dear. But don't worry, I won't condescend to you by writing up definitions of those words as I'm sure you know what they all mean.

Gruffalox wrote: »

Oooh and hypocrite...

Yes? You can dish out insults with the best of them but then get upset when you have to take it. Like all bullies you're the big mick only when you're not on the receiving end of it.

Gruffalux

excludedbin wrote: »

Well then all of mine are accurate descriptions, too. I seem to recall you even used 'creep' on the thread about O'Gorman.


Sauce for the goose, my dear. But don't worry, I won't condescend to you by writing up definitions of those words as I'm sure you know what they all mean.


Yes? You can dish out insults with the best of them but then get upset when you have to take it. Like all bullies you're the big mick only when you're not on the receiving end of it.

Peter Tatchell is a creep. He is a vocal defender of paedophiles and paedophilia over a long time. He has lauded them, even the ones convicted of child abuse. He has written proactively for paedophilia in their books. He has supported their ideas and befriended them. That is about as creepy as it gets. He is a big creepy creep all day long. And that's the least offensive thing he deserves to be called.

I, on the other hand, am not a creep, as you called people like me.

excludedbin

Yeah the person who's so blinded by ideology that they support the suffering and misery of children isn't a creep. Well that's sort of true, it's far worse than being a 'creep'. 'Psychopath' is probably a more accurate term for such a person so lacking in empathy. But okay, dude, I've better things to do than try to talk sense into someone with that kind of warped morality. Learned many a year ago that the kind of person who goes engages in those kinds of insane moral panics isn't the kind of person you can talk sense into.

Gruffalux

excludedbin wrote: »

Yeah the person who's so blinded by ideology that they support the suffering and misery of children isn't a creep. Well that's sort of true, it's far worse than being a 'creep'. 'Psychopath' is probably a more accurate term for such a person so lacking in empathy. But okay, dude, I've better things to do than try to talk sense into someone with that kind of warped morality. Learned many a year ago that the kind of person who goes engages in those kinds of insane moral panics isn't the kind of person you can talk sense into.

Now I am a ....dun dun dun...Psychopath.
(With a side helping of "warped morality".)

And earlier you said I should be judging your posts on their merits. Yeah. That will be a no from me.

excludedbin

At least I'm up front with my insults, I don't need to resort to the... incredibly overdone passive-aggressive shtick. Oh and I don't play the victim when I'm treated to a small helping of what I've dished out. Considering you've jumped to your own conclusions about who I am (something you seem fond of), you don't really have a leg to stand on here with regards chiding me about the merits of my words.

Ten of Swords

excludebin and Gruffalox stop sniping at each other

Sir Oxman

iptba wrote: »

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/welcome-to-the-world-you-created-j-k-rowling

Yup, he is bang on the money on not only on the existence of modern & pernicious cancel culture but that JKR did engage in it just a few years ago (as did Graham Linehan btw - he apologised later for it)



Hopefully, all who did in the past now see it for what it is - a very authoritarian tool to shut up (through fear of their consequences) those who disagree with critical theory or simply hold a differing viewpoint amongst the daily changing of the goalposts.

andekwarhola

excludedbin wrote: »

Sorry, passed my eyes over too many sharticles by him in the Indo back in the day so now my eyes just kind of... glaze over when I have the misfortune to encounter him again. The absolute nicest thing I can say about Kevin "I sexually identify as a member of the Protestant Ascendancy" Myers is that he's an inveterate contrarian who built his career out of misplaced smug superiority. Which of course means that every other contrarian and anti-"elite" complainer hangs off his every word. The quintessential "idiot's idea of a smart person" and, I'm sure, the originator of the idea that "if I disagree with the majority of people, that must automatically make me right".

Thought it was a dark day myself when he was hounded out of ireland.

I disagree with him politically on many things but I find him eloquent and often thought-provoking if only to challenge my own beliefs.

He certainly deserved censure for some of the things he's said but then again, so much stuff of equal poor judgement (and far worse) seems to be acceptable these days as opinion depending on the weather vane of political fashion or the platform.

I find it worrying sometimes that so many people on the left (and I would class myself as a Liberal/Left) these days seem to increasingly prefer canceling out other opinions rather than listening to them and rationally disputing them.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

andekwarhola wrote: »

Thought it was a dark day myself when he was hounded out of ireland.

I disagree with him politically on many things but I find him eloquent and often thought-provoking if only to challenge my own beliefs.

He certainly deserved censure for some of the things he's said but then again, so much stuff of equal poor judgement (and far worse) seems to be acceptable these days as opinion depending on the weather vane of political fashion or the platform.

I find it worrying sometimes that so many people on the left (and I would class myself as a Liberal/Left) these days seem to increasingly prefer canceling out other opinions rather than listening to them and rationally disputing them.

Bring back debating in schools. I hear it’s on the decline. Arguing in favour something you don’t necessarily agree with is great exercise for the brain.

excludedbin

andekwarhola wrote: »

Thought it was a dark day myself when he was hounded out of ireland.

I disagree with him politically on many things but I find him eloquent and often thought-provoking if only to challenge my own beliefs.

He certainly deserved censure for some of the things he's said but then again, so much stuff of equal poor judgement (and far worse) seems to be acceptable these days as opinion depending on the weather vane of political fashion or the platform.

I find it worrying sometimes that so many people on the left (and I would class myself as a Liberal/Left) these days seem to increasingly prefer canceling out other opinions rather than listening to them and rationally disputing them.

Never said I wanted to "cancel" Myers (but it's certainly revealing that you'd finish with that), only that I think he's an inveterate contrarian who says whatever he thinks will annoy people solely for the purpose of annoying them. It's not a mater of disagreeing with him politically, I'm not the kind of person who dismisses viewpoints just because they come from 'the opposing side', but Myers has no side beyond what he thinks will drive outrage clicks.

Rational dispute would require Myers to actually believe in the things he says. As such, I can't say it's any great loss that he's shuffled off to Brillo's rag.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Bring back debating in schools. I hear it’s on the decline. Arguing in favour something you don’t necessarily agree with is great exercise for the brain.

Indeed, there's some here who could do with considering the views of the opposing side. Sadly that side is all too often dismissed as "trans radical activists" or "misogynists", "rapists", "paedophiles", "groomers", etc. while anyone that dares to give as good as they get is rounded and ganged up on.

Kind of hard to debate when the group controlling the discussion is so hostile to outside disagreement. :pac:

statesaver

suicide_circus wrote: »

you give terfs far too much credit, its human biology that does that.

Exactly,

Transwomen are NOT women

Transmen are NOT men

and

2 + 2 = 4

andekwarhola

excludedbin wrote: »

Never said I wanted to "cancel" Myers (but it's certainly revealing that you'd finish with that), only that I think he's an inveterate contrarian who says whatever he thinks will annoy people solely for the purpose of annoying them. It's not a mater of disagreeing with him politically, I'm not the kind of person who dismisses viewpoints just because they come from 'the opposing side', but Myers has no side beyond what he thinks will drive outrage clicks.

Rational dispute would require Myers to actually believe in the things he says. As such, I can't say it's any great loss that he's shuffled off to Brillo's rag.


Indeed, there's some here who could do with considering the views of the opposing side. Sadly that side is all too often dismissed as "trans radical activists" or "misogynists", "rapists", "paedophiles", "groomers", etc. while anyone that dares to give as good as they get is rounded and ganged up on.

Kind of hard to debate when the group controlling the discussion is so hostile to outside disagreement. :pac:

You're just ranting and the antithesis of what I was trying to say. If we were having a conversation, you'd be twitching during my contribution to jump in with yours.

I'm not going to get pulled into this anyway. Just reading the thread (which is interesting and thought provoking on the whole) and thought I'd contribute briefly.

andekwarhola

Gruffalox wrote: »

You refer in a single post to "the warped minds of terfs", terfs as "hateful creeps", "loonies" who "force quackery" upon others.
You are a name caller, sir. That is all.

just on this point. As a relative neutral/neophyte that is enjoying and being informed by the debate - from all sides - would it be possible to widen the current Mod warning in post #1 (which I agree with) to also explicitly encompass phrases like the above to ensure that the debate continues to proceed with nonpartisan decorum and that there might not be any misinterpretation of what is deemed to be offensive by the admins?

Clarence Boddiker

First of many cases I would imagine. Personally I would be in favour of criminal prosecutions and severe consequences for those therapists and clinicians deemed guilty.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1284588709619347458

splinter65

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

First of many cases I would imagine. Personally I would be in favour of criminal prosecutions and severe consequences for those therapists and clinicians deemed guilty.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1284588709619347458

This young lady had better be prepared for the onslaught of hatred about to be heaped on her. I hope she has support and love.

Invidious

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

First of many cases I would imagine. Personally I would be in favour of criminal prosecutions and severe consequences for those therapists and clinicians deemed guilty.

She was 15 when she went to the Tavistock Centre in London, saying that she identified as a boy. After 3 sessions, she started receiving hormone blockers.

She now believes that the clinicians rushed to affirm the gender identity she was claiming to have at the time, and steered her prematurely towards medical intervention.

There will be an absolute torrent of lawsuits about this kind of thing in years to come, especially given the skyrocketing numbers of adolescent girls claiming to identify as boys and being rushed into irreversible medical treatment by irresponsible doctors.

suicide_circus

https://mobile.twitter.com/nic_jameson/status/1284325475414761473

Happy Sunday!!

TomTomTim

suicide_circus wrote: »

https://mobile.twitter.com/nic_jameson/status/1284325475414761473

Happy Sunday!!

Thankfully my breakfast was eaten before I looked at that.

Earthhorse

andekwarhola wrote: »

I disagree with him politically on many things but I find him eloquent and often thought-provoking if only to challenge my own beliefs.

It's funny, my brother says the same thing, but if Myers ever provoked a thought in anyone's mind I've yet to hear what it was. Controversy and argument? Sure! Thoughtful debate? Not to my recollection.

Myers was the master of making broad statements based on nothing more than his own bombast which he could easily back out of later by simply saying "Of course, that's not what I meant at all" even though the implication was clear.

Dissent alone does not contribute to the quality of our debates; it has to bring something of value in and of itself. If people are truly interested in raising the quality of debate we engage in today both on and offline (and I do think it needs to be drastically raised) they'd be well advised to steer clear of Myers. And Twitter too.

Gruffalux

suicide_circus wrote: »

https://mobile.twitter.com/nic_jameson/status/1284325475414761473

Happy Sunday!!

I wondered what was the provenance of that photo shoot. It seems to be for a magazine. Not yet published as far as I can make out. It is of Sonica Satana, who as this article relates - https://www.thebubble.com/call-me-mother-an-interview-with-sonica-satana - is called ''mother'' by a collective of people. I suppose the borrowed infant as paraphilic prop and the extended nipples to insinuate lactation are a play on that motif.

Edit not a magazine. A photographer called Kenny Lemes took it in 2019. I don't know if more widely published.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

andekwarhola wrote: »

just on this point. As a relative neutral/neophyte that is enjoying and being informed by the debate - from all sides - would it be possible to widen the current Mod warning in post #1 (which I agree with) to also explicitly encompass phrases like the above to ensure that the debate continues to proceed with nonpartisan decorum and that there might not be any misinterpretation of what is deemed to be offensive by the admins?

I totally agree but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

GreeBo

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

First of many cases I would imagine. Personally I would be in favour of criminal prosecutions and severe consequences for those therapists and clinicians deemed guilty.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1284588709619347458

It's terribly ironic that this rush to identify people as non binary is leading to exactly the problem that they are trying to solve, namely peoples "decided" genders not matching their "actual" sex.

How many times can you send identify before people can ignore your current claims without fear of reprisal?

iptba

This is trending on Twitter in Ireland at the moment:
#WhyImATransAlly
https://twitter.com/search?q=%23WhyImATransAlly&src=trend_click