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

Vic_08

This thread has gone down a particularly unpleasant cul-de-sac.

Gatling

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I don't think I will be going looking for that. There is obviously other issues going on with Yaniv if publishing pictures of genitals on twitter.

Amazed that Twitter allows it to be honest.

Social media tends be be quite weird when it comes to stuff like that , beheading are allowed as long as it marked as news , women breast feeding gets removed and the poster banned ,some one does a yaniv probably allowed under weird educational content

Vic_08

Vic_08 wrote: »

This thread has gone down a particularly unpleasant cul-de-sac.

It literally is a particularly unpleasant cul-de-sac. Don't go looking for it.

Gatling

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't go looking for it.

You know just saying that will make them go look

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

You know just saying that will make them go look

If I had to see it, so does everyone else.

One eyed Jack

Cestmoi 111 wrote: »

They are very different things for a woman to speak frankly about female biological events/functions versus trans identified men displaying photos of their genetalia and alleged periods post surgical penile reconfiguration.

I'm laughing at those who went to Yaniv's Twitter page, I mean come on, you knew what you were gonna see, right? I guess it's just the car-crash factor. Try clear your head before bedtime anyway!

I wish I’d read this before I read the rest of your post

Basically I’d see them as very much the same thing in terms of their effort to be vulgar for vulgarity sake, and for no other good reason. The idea of it reminded me of The Vagina Monologues, and that is one dreary, incredibly boring, uninteresting intellectual wankfest. I’m someone who truly appreciates dark humour and vulgar humour, laughing when I know it’s just wrong, incredibly inappropriate, but there’s a difference between that and what Gruffalox’ intentions are, and what it would be in reality - titillating no doubt for some people, but just offensive or disgusting to anyone else. It wouldn’t be in any way educational or informative and there’s just no value to it, nor would it encourage women to speak frankly about their intimate biological functions, because who does that? It’s not normal, most people don’t want to think about it, let alone hear about someone else’s intimate biological functions. It’s disgusting, and like you say - people know what to expect if they go looking for it, because there is that car-crash factor for some people of wanting to be disgusted and offended by something, so they go looking for it on purpose and then feign offence. There’s plenty that’s not offensive, just disgusting.

Now I have to try and clear my head before I go to sleep...

*shudder*

Gruffalux

https://irishwomenslobby.ie/speak-up-for-womens-rights/


Looks interesting. Good range of speakers, national and international, advocating on female rights. Zoom conference on March 8th. International Women's Day.

suicide_circus

Can see that being infiltrated!

Gruffalux

suicide_circus wrote: »

Can see that being infiltrated!

Was thinking that
But there are too many genuine sorts. Almost 300 followers within a few hours. I will check back in a few days and see how they are doing. The speakers look quite high profile. I was surprised.

Gruffalux

Gruffalux wrote: »

Was thinking that
But there are too many genuine sorts. Almost 300 followers within a few hours. I will check back in a few days and see how they are doing. The speakers look quite high profile. I was surprised.

Within 1 hour, I should say!

Gatling

suicide_circus wrote: »

Can see that being infiltrated!

I can only imagine how they will be labelled if they don't allow some tra to rant and rave about women's rights as men

Cestmoi 111

Removing link dump

This is the most shocking image for me of bio males playing on ladies/girls teams. I would honestly pull my daughters from playing with or against this person for fear of a serious injury. How can anyone see these images and think it’s right? How can the person involved view them and not be f*cking mortified? Imagine the slagging you’d give that person if you knew them.

Wonder where this person changes and showers.

silverharp

Cestmoi 111 wrote: »

Removing link dump

This is the most shocking image for me of bio males playing on ladies/girls teams. I would honestly pull my daughters from playing with or against this person for fear of a serious injury. How can anyone see these images and think it’s right? How can the person involved view them and not be f*cking mortified? Imagine the slagging you’d give that person if you knew them.

Wonder where this person changes and showers.

its clown world, its about normalizing the absurd and gaslighting you into thinking you are the weird one if you dont buy into it.

Gatling

silverharp wrote: »

its clown world, its about normalizing the absurd and gaslighting you into thinking you are the weird one if you dont buy into it.

See this is it ,

Were being made to believe it's exclusionary far right thinking,

suicide_circus

silverharp wrote: »

normalizing the absurd and gaslighting you into thinking you are the weird one if you dont buy into it.

Just say 'No'

Cestmoi 111

suicide_circus wrote: »

Just say 'No'

Absolutely. Never capitulate!
It was a clever stroke to make it dangerous to be labelled a TERF and then to describe biological realities as ‘terf logic’ and ‘transphobia’.

One eyed Jack

silverharp wrote: »

its clown world, its about normalizing the absurd and gaslighting you into thinking you are the weird one if you dont buy into it.

That goes both ways, to be fair, and it’s one of the reasons why people can have a common bond with each other, precisely because of the fact that they know what it’s like to be gaslighted into conforming with someone else’s ideas of reality -

Her teammates accept her without hesitation, in part, because they say they often feel like outsiders.

"We've been discriminated against for different reasons," Anderson says. "We're used to it. So to have someone come with us, you're discriminated against too. You are a part of our family as well. It's the common bond.

"We all have our own oppressions we are facing ourselves. Either we are lesbians or we are difference races or we dress like boys or we have piercings or tattoos or different hairstyles. All of us are already different, so it's like, where else would she be?"


Transsexual Gabrielle Ludwig returns to college court

Gatling wrote: »

See this is it ,

Were being made to believe it's exclusionary far right thinking,

But that’s exactly what it is? I wouldn’t call it “far right” or anything like that because I’m not a drama queen, but certainly it’s exclusionary when people who are opposed to people who are transgender being treated equally in society seek to demonise them and paint them out to be a danger to other people, making out that they should be excluded from participating equally in society.

It’s like SC says - Just say no. There’s no need for all the dramatics and contrived situations to try and make out there’s anything in self-ID that presents a danger to anyone, going so far as to try and prove it by entering sports and finding out that nobody really gives a shìt. There’s no danger to women or to women’s sports or any of the rest of it.

Watching Matt Cooper last night there was a lad with a plastic bag on his head and a put-on affectation giving it welly about his mental health and all the rest of it, claiming suffering, pain and misery were all part of life. I did the very thing SC suggested and switched over to something more interesting, because I couldn’t bear listening to Blindboy and his miserable shìtehawkery. No doubt some people will buy into it because for them that’s their idea of normal. It’s not normal for most people in my experience to be instilling that sort of fear of other people, paranoia and exclusionary attitude in their children.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There’s no danger to women or to women’s sports or any of the rest of it.

Yes ,yes there is ,

Actually how does it work you can exclude someone while decrying the idea of others being exclusionary ,
Seems you want it every which way.

They are treated equally , healthcare , education , employment and housing

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

Yes ,yes there is ,

Actually how does it work you can exclude someone while decrying the idea of others being exclusionary ,
Seems you want it every which way.

Who, or what group exactly have I personally suggesting should be excluded from participating in society equally as everyone else? Throughout this thread I’ve suggested that if people wish to exclude themselves from society and play the victim because they’re paranoid about other people being dangerous, I really don’t have any problem whatsoever with them doing so. I don’t think it’s in any way normal or healthy, but I’m pretty sure that means I’m dangerous to them :pac:

Gatling wrote: »

They are treated equally , healthcare , education , employment and housing

Exactly - they’re treated equally in law now, because everyone is equally protected from discrimination in law at least, whereas they weren’t before the gender recognition act, because people who are transgender weren’t recognised in Irish law. Recognition of people who are transgender in Irish law, didn’t take rights away from anyone else. Everyone still has the same rights as they had before, only now they have an extra one which didn’t exist in Irish law before 2015.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Who, or what group exactly have I personally suggesting should be excluded from participating

The chap from trinity

Cestmoi 111

Gatling wrote: »

Yes ,yes there is ,

Actually how does it work you can exclude someone while decrying the idea of others being exclusionary ,
Seems you want it every which way.

They are treated equally , healthcare , education , employment and housing

I have One Eyed Jack on my don't see list (sorry Jack, I can just never tell if you're for, against, or indifferent to the things you post).
I'm going to deduce from the quote here that OEJ suggested there was no danger to women in being called TERFS. Women have lost jobs, friends, families, careers and reputations from being called out as TERFs. That's in addition to having online pile-ons encouraged, them and their children being doxxed, and being physically assaulted at organised women's rights events. Of course there is a danger in all that.

Gatling

Cestmoi 111 wrote: »

I have One Eyed Jack on my don't see list (sorry Jack, I can just never tell if you're for, against, or indifferent to the things you post).
I'm going to deduce from the quote here that OEJ suggested there was no danger to women in being called TERFS. Women have lost jobs, friends, families, careers and reputations from being called out as TERFs. That's in addition to having online pile-ons encouraged, them and their children being doxxed, and being physically assaulted at organised women's rights events. Of course there is a danger in all that.

And it's a small cohort leading this ,I read somewhere in a poll close to 50% of women wouldn't discuss the topic for fear of a backlash for voicing their opinions ,
This is not about exclusionary language the Loudest and most vocal opinion seems to want to delete women ,the word woman , women and girls is being made out to be some how offensive to a small cohort ,
It's about Deletion

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

The chap from trinity

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you accidentally snipped the part of my question where I asked about where I had suggested people be excluded from, here it is again -

Who, or what group exactly have I personally suggesting should be excluded from participating in society equally as everyone else?

We were discussing the idea in terms of people’s legal rights, not some contrived effort which really doesn’t help your argument when he was permitted to participate in the race in the women’s category, and instead of providing any supporting evidence for your theory that it would kill women’s sports, you’re celebrating his behaviour because according to you and a few others, it shows the flaws in self-ID. It doesn’t, because he could have done what he did even if self-ID in Irish law had never existed, he could still exploit people who were acting in good faith towards him acting in bad faith towards them, to make a point that people could act in bad faith towards other people!

He tried to stick it to the man, and ended up with egg on his face, because he had convinced himself that people would care, and was disappointed when they didn’t care as much as he thought they should. You’re employing the same double standard in expecting that I should elevate what happened to the same drama queen levels as you’re doing. People just aren’t as stupid as you need them to be.

LLMMLL

Cestmoi 111 wrote: »

I have One Eyed Jack on my don't see list (sorry Jack, I can just never tell if you're for, against, or indifferent to the things you post).
I'm going to deduce from the quote here that OEJ suggested there was no danger to women in being called TERFS. Women have lost jobs, friends, families, careers and reputations from being called out as TERFs. That's in addition to having online pile-ons encouraged, them and their children being doxxed, and being physically assaulted at organised women's rights events. Of course there is a danger in all that.

Um no. OEJ suggested nothing of the sort. I see we’ve got to the “I blocked someone so I’ll just have to make up an argument they made” portion of the debate.

Annasopra

Gatling wrote: »

And it's a small cohort leading this ,I read somewhere in a poll close to 50% of women wouldn't discuss the topic for fear of a backlash for voicing their opinions ,
This is not about exclusionary language the Loudest and most vocal opinion seems to want to delete women ,the word woman , women and girls is being made out to be some how offensive to a small cohort ,
It's about Deletion

A huge amount of Irish women are trans inclusive though. Nah its not that small.

https://feministire.com/2018/01/22/an-open-letter-to-the-organisers-of-the-we-need-to-talk-tour-from-a-group-of-feminists-in-ireland/

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you accidentally snipped the part of my question where I asked about where I had suggested people be excluded



He tried to stick it to the man, and ended up with egg on his face, because he had convinced himself that people would care, and was disappointed when they didn’t care as much as he thought they should. You’re employing the same double standard in expecting that I should elevate what happened to the same drama queen levels as you’re doing.

You said you would have stopped him from taking part that's excludsion ,your using exclusionary language while crying about exclusionary language ,
Utterly hypocritical and contradictory .

But ,but ,but won't work here your no better than those your claiming to be against ....

Gatling

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

A huge amount of Irish women are trans inclusive though.

Anti-abortion and anti racism so all the usual barnacle groups who latch on to anything to make their agenda known ,

Seen bigger drinks orders on a wet Tuesday night


It that article is considered huge by your standards come back when you have something a little bigger much bigger ,in the hundreds of thousands preferably.



ICKI CAMPBELL on August 16, 2018 at 6:36 pm
No, this is not what either sisterhood or “inclusion” look like, and its very sad. Its what mindless, tribalistic group-think looks like. Feminism in Ireland looks as though its almost as dead as it is in the U.S., and just as unimpressive if not all but unrecognizable. But the UK is finally waking up, so maybe others will too. You should also loose the we’re speaking for all women (or feminists) standpoint, because you most certainly are not. Many in the trans community have royally abused their own as well with this attitude, in their attempt to demonize, silence, and erase the actually majority everywhere that simply disagrees with the most extreme aspects of the current dominant trans narrative (which is certainly only one among several). Again, very sad. Truly the most thoughtless iteration of both feminism and intersectionality ever….Thanks but no thanks. Women everywhere deserve much better. And the women who need (and therefore deserve) it the most are those who are born into circumstances and conditions shaped entirely by the simple fact of the bodies they were born in, that they can in no way escape by simply identifying their way out of. I mean, seriously, call me when you’re ready to have a considerably more mature, complex, reality-based conversation about all this, because it is very long overdue from many “feminists'” end.

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

You said you would have stopped him from taking part that's excludsion ,your using exclusionary language while crying about exclusionary language ,
Utterly hypocritical and contradictory .

But ,but ,but won't work here your no better than those your claiming to be against ....

I’m not crying about exclusionary language at all? I have no problem with being thought of as exclusionary or discriminatory, by anyone. You were complaining about people being seen as exclusionary, and I was pointing out that they are being exclusionary if they wish to exclude people! It’s not inclusive, is it? I’m not against anyone either, I’m against certain ideas that people hold, and when they express their opinions in public, I express my disagreement with their ideas. Their goal is to have their ideas take form in society, I’d rather their ideas for society didn’t take form. Playing the victim when someone doesn’t agree with you and questions you on your ideas is just incredibly immature. You hardly think you can say what you like about people? That’s at least the first thing you’ve gotten right - I do think I’m better than people who think they can say what they like about other people.

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

I mean, seriously, call me when you’re ready to have a considerably more mature, complex, reality-based conversation about all this, because it is very long overdue from many “feminists'” end.

Essentially, call her when people are ready to have a discussion on her terms? Why would anyone who doesn’t agree with her, call her, when they are having discussions on their terms with people who agree with them? They don’t need her! She imagines people can’t manage for themselves without her or something? :pac:

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You hardly think you can say what you like about people?

Yes I do ,

As long as your not been intentionally offensive ,but yes I call it as I see it and I'm more than happy to call out hypocrisy,and if people feel the need to cry teacher teacher mods get in here and remove this that because I'm offended doesn't go down too well either but I believe thats something the majority of posters agree with