Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I wouldn’t have thought of Tennis as a big money sport tbh, both men and women are pretty much on the same levels in terms of their pay.

Not a hope are they on the same level ..... It's a whole different thread

Gatling

LLMMLL wrote: »

Well that debates been done to death. All I’m saying is there is no contradiction between supporting self id,

It's seems to be a case of a big contradiction ,

All women are women even when they are men ,or has that changed?

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If I have a view which is patently and unequivocally incorrect (ie that a man can be a woman or that biology wouldn't give men an advantage in most sports) then absolutely. I have no problem applying that standard to my own life.

But that’s you determining your own standards? Would you normally hold views that you know are patently and unequivocally incorrect? I don’t believe for a minute you’re that stupid, I don’t think anyone is, so you’re not applying the same standard in your own life. You’re still applying your standards to how you think other people should live.

That’s what it means to acknowledge that other people are not compelled to adhere to your individual standards. It’s why we have laws which protect all people equally from unlawful discrimination on any of the nine grounds in Irish law, so that you can live by your standards, and they can live by theirs, and neither is under any obligation to comply with the other person’s worldview.

That’s what it means to live in a democratic society.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s why we have laws which protect all people equally from unlawful discrimination on any of the nine grounds in Irish law, so that you can live by your standards,

But yet you claim you can discriminate off someone not taking their trans seriously enough

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

Not a hope are they on the same level ..... It's a whole different thread

In terms of their pay, the are.

And why not if you imagine that’s not the case would you think it’s a whole different thread from a thread discussing gender identity in modern Ireland? Why not discuss the imaginary gender pay gap in employment or the whopping pay gap between how much women and men are paid in soccer? Or how women athletes are treated like dirt compared to men athletes?

Surely this is the thread for it? As it could put to bed a lot of the nonsense myths about why men wish to compete in women’s sports or vice versa - women wish to compete in men’s sports. Since the inauguration of the Olympic Games women were for a long time prohibited from competing altogether even though they were perfectly able to compete with men, only one man had the power to exclude them based upon his own funky notions about women at the time -

Coubertin also spoke against women's sports and the Women's World Games: "Impratical, uninteresting, unaesthetic, and we are not afraid to add: incorrect, such would be in our opinion this female half-Olympiad".


Pierre de Coubertin, about 100 years ago.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

In terms of their pay, the are.

And why not if you imagine that’s not the case would you think it’s a whole different thread from a thread discussing gender identity in modern Ireland?

No and no .

It's just an excuse to derail the the current discussion ,

So yeah it's a whole separate thread

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Coubertin also spoke against women's sports and the Women's World Games: "Impratical, uninteresting, unaesthetic, and we are not afraid to add: incorrect, such would be in our opinion this female half-Olympiad".


Pierre de Coubertin, about 100 years ago.

Hard to see the relevance of this to your argument (although that isn’t untypical) but it’s the ending of female athleticism that is what is worrying about with regards to gender self identification.

You continue to argue against yourself.

alan partridge aha

I'm in top 200 in mens tennis, so going nowhere fast, a feck ill identify as a woman, now I'm unbeatable and raking in the money.

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

But yet you claim you can discriminate off someone not taking their trans seriously enough

Where did I make that claim? Why would I even care? What you’re suggesting wouldn’t be unlawful discrimination in any case. You’re still not getting the point that it would depend upon the circumstances of any particular case what laws would or would not apply. This is why people who imagine they have a slam dunk case of unlawful discrimination often have to be shown to be wrong, and even when they lose their case, they still believe an independent arbitrator was wrong in their determination!

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

This simply isn’t true. They could easily have said that he could not compete in the women’s category, and there is nothing stopping them from doing so. Whether he would have won or lost his case would have been determined by the facts surrounding the case,

No they could not on what grounds could they actually discriminate if the person self identified as female,

Trying to justify it by claiming a hypothetical court case might not agree with the act of discrimination..
Now the concern of womens sport and fairness to female competitor in female events

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Where did I make that claim? Why would I even care?

You said you would stop them based off you believing they were taking the piss ,ie not taking their trans seriously ,
Still how you would know that still hasn't been answered

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hard to see the relevance of this to your argument (although that isn’t untypical) but it’s the ending of female athleticism that is what is worrying about with regards to gender self identification.

You continue to argue against yourself.

With respect, you quoted my post to argue with it. That’s not me arguing with myself, the responsibility for any argument is entirely with your choosing to argue with my opinion, in spite of the fact that you consistently point out my posts are incoherent and irrelevant and all the rest of it. I’m not responsible for your failure when it doesn’t appear anyone else is having any difficulty understanding what I’ve written.

You appear to have understood the relevance of my post enough to try and explain that it’s the ending of female athleticism you’re concerned about with regards to gender self identification, in spite of the fact that female athletes are only being barred from participating fully in sports because of the decisions made by sporting organisations which govern any particular sport. It’s the very reason why breakaway organisations are forming in sports to allow for equal participation of all people in sports regardless of their sex or gender identity.

I’m sure we’re all aware by now of the inclusion of breakdancing as an Olympic sport in a desperate gasp to remain relevant in a world that’s changing all around them. I guess it’s one way to prop up a loss-making enterprise - ‘civic pride’ or some shìte, like winning the Eurovision Song Contest -

Olympic Caveats: Host Cities Risk Debt, Scandal

Annasopra

Gatling wrote: »

But your opinion is any man who self identifies as a woman is a real woman ,so you would have to support this persons choice to self identify for what ever reason be it for an advantage in sports , access to women's spaces and so on

No. Noone supports a person identifying as trans for the sole reason of competing in sport. This "whatever reason" is drivel and nonsense. I support a persons choice to identify as trans for the reason they are trans and no other reason.

Annasopra

Gatling wrote: »

No they could not on what grounds could they actually discriminate if the person self identified as female,

Trying to justify it by claiming a hypothetical court case might not agree with the act of discrimination..
Now the concern of womens sport and fairness to female competitor in female events

Easily enough on the grounds he hasnt actually legally got a gender recognition certificate.

Gatling

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No. Noone supports a person identifying as trans for the sole reason of competing in sports

But once they self identify as a woman they are considered trans or is this just another flip-flop can't be explained away so easy ,

So basically a small cohort want to decide who is and who isn't a woman, we've seen this with prisons men with histories of committing violent sex crimes claiming to be trans so they get any to women's prisons.

It's a total a contradiction

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

You said you would stop them based off you believing they were taking the piss ,ie not taking their trans seriously ,
Still how you would know that still hasn't been answered

No, that’s your reasoning, not mine. I’ve said it numerous times now, it’s not based upon whether or not a person is transgender or whether they are male or female, it’s based upon their feigning offence when it is clarified with them that they are either male or female. You must imagine it’s impossible to tell when someone is taking the piss. It’s really not. It’s quite easy to tell, especially when it’s easy to tell they’re feigning offence, and come to the conclusion on that basis that they’re just talking the piss. It’s not about whether or not I hold any beliefs one way or the other about their gender, it’s that I don’t believe they have any serious interest in participating in the race, and THAT’S why I would suggest they should jog on... just not as a participant in the race in which everyone else is competing.

Gatling

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Easily enough on the grounds he hasnt actually legally got a gender recognition certificate.

They don't need one to compete in events

ingalway

LLMMLL wrote: »

Well that debates been done to death. All I’m saying is there is no contradiction between supporting self id, and having personal opinion or knowledge that someone is taking the piss out of self Id laws.

Self ID is wide open for the piss to be taken out of. The person signs a one page form. They don't need to see a doctor, they don't need to take any medication, they don't need to see a counselor or a psychiatrist. Absolutely nothing other than their signature. It's ridiculous, dangerous, and in the case of sports, extremely unfair.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

it’s not based upon whether or not a person is transgender or whether they are male or female, it’s based upon their feigning offence when it is clarified with them that they are either male or female.

But they clarified they identified as female on registration , doesn't matter what you claim you would do , they identified as female you have nothing to come back with

CtevenSrowder

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Easily enough on the grounds he hasnt actually legally got a gender recognition certificate.

But he could get one and as such would instantly become an actual women in your view. So you don't think he's a woman now but if he signs a piece of paper suddenly you do. In fact, you have stated that someone simply has to declare to you that they are a women for you to believe that they are, so the GR cert isn't even required.

Had it been you at the signing up you would've accepted him as a female (even though deep down you would know fully well he isn't), but would've pretended to believe he is anyway to keep up the pretence, only to have your initial believe confirmed by the bloke himself.

Upon 're-declaring' so to speak as a man, he suddenly becomes one again, in your view at least.

alan partridge aha

It would be laughable if it wasn't so serious. Women who train so hard to be the best in their sporting field to then be denied by a piece of paper.

One eyed Jack

ingalway wrote: »

Self ID is wide open for the piss to be taken out of. The person signs a one page form. They don't need to see a doctor, they don't need to take any medication, they don't need to see a counselor or a psychiatrist. Absolutely nothing other than their signature. It's ridiculous, dangerous, and in the case of sports, extremely unfair.

All laws are wide open to abuse, one only has to spot a loophole, and that’s what people who are of a mind to abuse laws and find loopholes in order to exploit people will tend to do. There also exists laws under which we punish those people who choose to violate the laws which govern a society. Criminal behaviour isn’t tolerated in society, and self ID laws don’t encourage or facilitate criminal behaviour. Their aim is solely to prohibit unlawful discrimination on the basis of gender identity, nothing more. That’s it. Marriage laws too require nothing more than a person’s signature, or plenty of legislation in Family law doesn’t even require a signature. Applying for any form of Government assistance generally requires a signature (there are provisions made for people who are illiterate or cannot write), which have far greater implications and impact on society than self-ID laws will ever have.

Essentially, you’re grasping at straws to conflate completely unrelated concepts under the one umbrella.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

With respect, you quoted my post to argue with it. That’s not me arguing with myself, the responsibility for any argument is entirely with your choosing to argue with my opinion, in spite of the fact that you consistently point out my posts are incoherent and irrelevant and all the rest of it. I’m not responsible for your failure when it doesn’t appear anyone else is having any difficulty understanding what I’ve written.

You appear to have understood the relevance of my post enough to try and explain that it’s the ending of female athleticism you’re concerned about with regards to gender self identification, in spite of the fact that female athletes are only being barred from participating fully in sports because of the decisions made by sporting organisations which govern any particular sport. It’s the very reason why breakaway organisations are forming in sports to allow for equal participation of all people in sports regardless of their sex or gender identity.

I’m sure we’re all aware by now of the inclusion of breakdancing as an Olympic sport in a desperate gasp to remain relevant in a world that’s changing all around them. I guess it’s one way to prop up a loss-making enterprise - ‘civic pride’ or some shìte, like winning the Eurovision Song Contest -

Olympic Caveats: Host Cities Risk Debt, Scandal

Almost all of that post is a distraction. Do you just google random sh1te to post. Only you can even begin to know the reason why you mention the breakdancing at the olympics and the relevance to . And your second paragraph is clouded in mystery.

This is fairly typical.

Cestmoi 111

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm with you. I think the college had no choice, and would have no choice if he applied again.

That would be an interesting move, if he were to do the same thing again. Could he just say well maybe I wasn’t really a woman before but NOW I am? The College would probably be better off allowing it again for fear of backlash for calling him out on his gender identity.

I think most posters here, including me, don’t think this fella was acting in worse faith than any male who claims to be a woman/girl and then competes in female sport. In fact I think most of us would support him more as he was trying to highlight an inherent unfairness in having to treat people as whatever gender they say they feel like at any given time.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Marriage laws too require nothing more than a person’s signature, or plenty of legislation in Family law doesn’t even require a signature. Applying for any form of Government assistance generally requires a signature (there are provisions made for people who are illiterate or cannot write), which have far greater implications and impact on society than self-ID laws will ever ha

But you also need the important stuff like several photo id's proof of address and in some cases you could face questions like immigration status up and including a full investigation,
the same applies for benefits you photo is taken and ran through facial recognition software ,
It's not so simple as you made it out to be ,

Self identifying is actually easier

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Almost all of that post is a distraction. Do you just google random sh1te to post. Only you can even begin to know the reason why you mention the breakdancing at the olympics and the relevance to . And your second paragraph is clouded in mystery.

This is fairly typical.

Is your sole purpose of participation in the thread just to offer critiques of my posts? Because so far you’ve contributed fcukall else tbh.

volchitsa

One eyed Jack wrote: »

All laws are wide open to abuse, one only has to spot a loophole, and that’s what people who are of a mind to abuse laws and find loopholes in order to exploit people will tend to do. There also exists laws under which we punish those people who choose to violate the laws which govern a society. Criminal behaviour isn’t tolerated in society, and self ID laws don’t encourage or facilitate criminal behaviour. Their aim is solely to prohibit unlawful discrimination on the basis of gender identity, nothing more. That’s it. Marriage laws too require nothing more than a person’s signature, or plenty of legislation in Family law doesn’t even require a signature. Applying for any form of Government assistance generally requires a signature (there are provisions made for people who are illiterate or cannot write), which have far greater implications and impact on society than self-ID laws will ever have.

Essentially, you’re grasping at straws to conflate completely unrelated concepts under the one umbrella.

Complete nonsense. Have you never married? There's lots of documentation required. The fact that it all has to be given in before the wedding day doesn't change that fact. To prove you're not already married, for one thing.

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

But you also need the important stuff like several photo id's proof of address and in some cases you could face questions like immigration status up and including a full investigation,
the same applies for benefits you photo is taken and ran through facial recognition software ,
It's not so simple as you made it out to be ,

Self identifying is actually easier

Nothing ever is, including self-ID, and I wouldn’t consider applying for a gender recognition certificate any easier than applying for a birth or a marriage certificate? Neither of which I had to provide any photo evidence?

The GRC is only a small consideration among people who are transgender in any case, they’re generally more concerned about the provision of healthcare and services and employment and being treated equally as everyone else in society with regards to being protected from discrimination. I’d always encourage anyone in their position to apply for a GRC because it gives them legal protection in Irish law as opposed to having to give a shyte for the kind of asshole that engages in this sort of behaviour -


Tesco launches inquiry into employees posting online photos and videos abusing trans customers

One eyed Jack

volchitsa wrote: »

Complete nonsense. Have you never married? There's lots of documentation required. The fact that it all has to be given in before the wedding day doesn't change that fact. To prove you're not already married, for one thing.

Yeah, just like the GRC if you actually wanted to equate them then -

Apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate / Revised Birth Certificate

I only had to put my signature to a piece of paper was the extent of any effort required, just like ingalway’s claim that all that is required for a GRC is a signature. It’s even easier now than it was before to apply for a marriage certificate -


Marriage certificate

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Nothing ever is, including self-ID, and I wouldn’t consider applying for a gender recognition certificate any easier than applying for a birth or a marriage certificate? Neither of which I had to provide any photo evidence?

The GRC is only a small consideration among people who are transgender in any case,

Married in the last few years and needed several photo id's and proof of address ,
You get your certificate after you get married and before you get married you apply for your marriage license
Marriage notification appointment checklist
You will need to download and complete the capture of data form and bring it to the appointment.

Documents everyone needs
Both of you must bring the original and a colour photocopy of the photo page of one of the following:

passport
refugee card/asylum card issued by Department of Justice and Equality
national identity card from an EU country accepting them as a travel document
Photo ID documents must be in date.

You will also need:

the original and photocopy of your birth certificates
proof of address - original and photocopy dated within last 3 months
your PPS numbers

Birth certificate no don't need photo Id but then again it's not an ID . but you need ID to register you child and get a birth certificate for them,

GRC has seen very little take up much like the numbers who have surgeries or have sought referrals for gender services especially with children ,it's like it's going out of fashion