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

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gatling wrote: »

Of course there is it's blindingly obvious to all but a few

I love the ignore function. I only have about two or three users on the ignore list across the whole site but it is so worth it. They are carefully chosen and actually facilitate my exposure to a wide range of views rather than stymie it. It has been invaluable in this thread.

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

Of course there is it's blindingly obvious to all but a few

There really isn’t, and claiming “it’s blinding obvious to all but a few” is fine if you’re referring to people who are completely ignorant of Human Rights Law. I can understand how a contrived narrative which has no basis in Human Rights Law would be obvious to them.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There really isn’t, and claiming “it’s blinding obvious to all but a few” is fine if you’re referring to people

You keep bringing up law this and law that ,
Got very little to do with the discussion it's just another excuse or attempt to drag it off topic ,

Gatling

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I love the ignore function. I only have about two or three users on the ignore list across the whole site but it is so worth it. They are carefully chosen and actually facilitate my exposure to a wide range of views rather than stymie it. It has been invaluable in this thread.

Yeah ive one to two on ignore but I like a bit of a challenge and sooner or later egg lands on smug faces ,
I'll leave excuses and buts for others to make

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well, this official survey done in the UK a few years ago is very interesting. Once you work past the feel-good generalities and get down to the brass tacks, people have concerns; both men and women and across age groups and political lines. There’s a lot of information to unpack there. But it’s a very interesting survey.

That tells me that people are dumb. Trans women are women and should be legally allowed to self identify but transwomen can’t partake in sports. Then you are not putting them wholly in the category women, sunshines.

Cretins.

Edit:

Also it looks like people don’t know what self identification means. They support self identification but do not support that people should not have to get a doctors cert.

Excuse the double negative but it is what the chart is showing

One eyed Jack

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Really? Lots of stuff has been posted on this thread. I saw something get deleted for “link-dumping” in the last few pages. I’m not sure what the criterion for acceptable links and supporting information is, to be honest. This is a survey from our nearest neighbour and probably the most culturally similar country to us in the world. I think it’s very relevant.

Well, if it gets deleted and anyone wants to see the survey, holla at me via PM and I’ll send it to you.

A link to your sources would be handy, so people can read it for themselves -


Where does the British public stand on transgender rights?


A recent YouGov poll for PinkNews showed that by 50% to 27% Britons believe that people should be allowed to self-identify as a gender different to the one they were assigned at birth. While still a commanding lead, this figure is a slight decline since 2019 (56% to 23%).

The results of another YouGov survey, conducted a week earlier as part of our public data programme which looks at public opinion on key social issues over time, take a comprehensive look at where the public stands on transgender rights.

Across the survey two distinct groups of opinion emerged, based on politics, gender and age. Labour, Lib Dem and Remain voters, along with women and younger people, are likelier to hold more trans-friendly views than Conservative and Leave voters, men and older people.

...

Women tend to reject the argument that allowing transgender women to use female facilities puts them at risk. By 46% to 28% women say that doing so does not present any genuine risk of harm. Men are more sceptical, thinking such a move puts women in danger by 31% to 37%. Among the overall population 39% believe there to be no genuine risk compared to 32% who disagree.

...

People also tend to believe transgender women who have been victims of assault or rape should have access to women’s refuges (47% vs 26%). Please note, this question was not asked about transgender women who have had not undergone gender reassignment surgery.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

A link to your sources would be handy, so people can read it for themselves -


Where does the British public stand on transgender rights?


A recent YouGov poll for PinkNews showed that by 50% to 27% Britons believe that people should be allowed to self-identify as a gender different to the one they were assigned at birth. While still a commanding lead, this figure is a slight decline since 2019 (56% to 23%).

The results of another YouGov survey, conducted a week earlier as part of our public data programme which looks at public opinion on key social issues over time, take a comprehensive look at where the public stands on transgender rights.

Across the survey two distinct groups of opinion emerged, based on politics, gender and age. Labour, Lib Dem and Remain voters, along with women and younger people, are likelier to hold more trans-friendly views than Conservative and Leave voters, men and older people.

...

Women tend to reject the argument that allowing transgender women to use female facilities puts them at risk. By 46% to 28% women say that doing so does not present any genuine risk of harm. Men are more sceptical, thinking such a move puts women in danger by 31% to 37%. Among the overall population 39% believe there to be no genuine risk compared to 32% who disagree.

...

People also tend to believe transgender women who have been victims of assault or rape should have access to women’s refuges (47% vs 26%). Please note, this question was not asked about transgender women who have had not undergone gender reassignment surgery.

That was all in her diagram. Which is all you need.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

A recent YouGov poll for PinkNews showed that

Propaganda is all it is

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

Propaganda is all it is

Well the survey is what it is. It shows that people don’t know what they are supporting.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That was all in her diagram. Which is all you need.

Might be all you needed to form the conclusions you did, but I’d rather look at the sources of the information and examine the methodology for myself than simply take a graphic dumped into the thread at face value.

Gatling

Deleted User wrote: »

Well the survey is what it is. It shows that people don’t know what they are supporting.

Very true ,

Watch it will be a poll of less than 100 people ,I'm sure Vernon Kay might ask something similar we surveyed 100 people which is better McDonald's or burger king "were looking for top answers people

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Might be all you needed to form the conclusions you did, but I’d rather look at the sources of the information and examine the methodology for myself than simply take a graphic dumped into the thread at face value.

The graphic has the same data as your (selective but over long) reposting of the link. This is why we use charts.

It’s actually fairly well done. The columns are left to right most favourable to least favourable, divided into ages, party affiliations, and positions on Brexit. The rows are questions asked. The strength of the green or red marks, agree or disagree, indicates a majority or a plurality. The latter being lighter.

Going down the column you can see that even 18-24 year olds (the most liberal) are opposed to sports desegregation, at least the plurality of them are, and believe that a doctor should sign off, which means they don’t understand what they support.

It’s even worse for All Britons. Transwomen are women but need segregation from women in sports, bathrooms, dressing rooms etc.

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

You keep bringing up law this and law that ,
Got very little to do with the discussion it's just another excuse or attempt to drag it off topic ,

Gatling wrote: »

Propaganda is all it is

You were all for the survey a minute ago when you thought it supported your beliefs, now you can’t tear it apart fast enough, calling it propaganda and claiming I keep bringing Irish Law into a thread on an Irish forum, discussing Gender Identity in Modern Ireland... and you’re telling me it has nothing to do with the discussion, and is dragging the thread off topic, while another poster is telling me the graphic is all I need.

Gatling wrote: »

Yeah ive one to two on ignore but I like a bit of a challenge and sooner or later egg lands on smug faces ,
I'll leave excuses and buts for others to make

I think you’re gonna need a face shield for that one mate.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You were all for the survey a minute ago when you thought it supported your beliefs, now you can’t tear it apart fast enough, calling it propaganda and claiming I keep bringing Irish Law into a thread on an Irish forum, discussing Gender Identity in Modern Ireland... and you’re telling me it has nothing to do with the discussion, and is dragging the thread off topic, while another poster is telling me the graphic is all I need.

The survey shows that people who believe that trans women are women also believe in sports segregation. Which is the main topic here.

By the way two posters can have different opinions.

Sir Oxman

And more vitally, the essential view changes when people put the wooly thinking away for a second, put their thinking hats on and realise it's not at all what it has been presented as and the question asked reflects that in plain language -
Mind you, I'd be a bit kinder to those that virtue signal for a living because the whole ideology is deceptive as is it's fcked up parents - critical theory.
Here's a small example - something as innocuous as Miss World or Ireland - 'there would be no problem having a transwoman in the competition , sure it's 2021 <--Liveline this week by someone involved in it (a woman)
It's just so stupid, as is the belief that looks absolutely don't matter in the beauty parade (also said by that woman)
The 'sure it's 2021' line is a sign the speaker is a vacuous, annoying dolt.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You were all for the survey a minute ago when you thought it supported your beliefs



I think you’re gonna need a face shield for that one mate.

I never said I did or i didn't .

But it's not the first time a claim has been made .

I don't need a shield I tend not to get it usually leave that to others to take

Gatling

Deleted User wrote: »

The survey shows that people who believe that trans women are women also believe in sports segregation. Which is the main topic here.

By the way two posters can have different opinions.

They just run around in circles chasing their own Tails trying to make out they are always right

Vic_08

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You were all for the survey a minute ago when you thought it supported your beliefs, now you can’t tear it apart fast enough, calling it propaganda and claiming I keep bringing Irish Law into a thread on an Irish forum, discussing Gender Identity in Modern Ireland... and you’re telling me it has nothing to do with the discussion, and is dragging the thread off topic, while another poster is telling me the graphic is all I need.

If instead of feverishly typing yet another wall of blather to describe a survey that had already been posted to the thread you actually read it, you might have noticed it was the results of TWO surveys.

Only the first question was from the poll conducted for pink news, the rest for a government contract. Coincidentally the Pink News one had a far higher lean towards trans rights than the other in relation to the same topic which just so happens to coincide with the political views Pink News strongly push.

The accusation against them of bias and propaganda is a valid one, no way should data they produce be considered to be balanced.

Gatling

Vic_08 wrote: »

Coincidentally the Pink News one had a far higher lean towards trans rights than the other in relation to the same topic which just so happens to coincide with the political views Pink News strongly push.

The accusation against them of bias and propaganda is a valid one, no way should data they produce be considered to be balanced.

Wouldn't be the first time it's been pointed out ,how biased and trans propaganda opinions pieces coming from the pink news ,at one stage after It mentioned the sites first few pages were all Pro trans pieces.
It's TV game show stuff

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

Well the survey is what it is. It shows that people don’t know what they are supporting.

Well, Pink News naturally picked and chose what to highlight. I prefer to just show the survey and let people interpret the results themselves. I actually think the survey shows that when it gets down to the nitty gritty, people quickly betray their vague “be kind” notions. When the ramifications of what that actually means are spelled out and we are no longer dealing with vague hypotheticals, people are much more conservative about what they are comfortable with.

Personally, and I’ve said this before on this topic, I think so many people have not thought this through at all. And those of us who have thought it through are often branded as bigots for considering where it can lead. I’m not really blaming the “be kind” people too much. I do think that their hearts are in the right place for the most part. The ones who aren’t quick to call people bigots, that is.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Sir Oxman wrote: »

And more vitally, the essential view changes when people put the wooly thinking away for a second, put their thinking hats on and realise it's not at all what it has been presented as and the question asked reflects that in plain language -
Mind you, I'd be a bit kinder to those that virtue signal for a living because the whole ideology is deceptive as is it's fcked up parents - critical theory.
Here's a small example - something as innocuous as Miss World or Ireland - 'there would be no problem having a transwoman in the competition , sure it's 2021 <--Liveline this week by someone involved in it (a woman)
It's just so stupid, as is the belief that looks absolutely don't matter in the beauty parade (also said by that woman)
The 'sure it's 2021' line is a sign the speaker is a vacuous, annoying dolt.

Bingo. That’s why I found it such an interesting survey. Once the questions move past feelz-related ones to actual real life scenarios, the tune changes.

I’m glad somebody else finds “Hello, it’s *insert year here*!” exclamations completely vacuous. What does that even mean? What did it ever mean?

Cestmoi 111

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Really? Lots of stuff has been posted on this thread. I saw something get deleted for “link-dumping” in the last few pages. I’m not sure what the criterion for acceptable links and supporting information is, to be honest. This is a survey from our nearest neighbour and probably the most culturally similar country to us in the world. I think it’s very relevant.

Well, if it gets deleted and anyone wants to see the survey, holla at me via PM and I’ll send it to you.

I had quoted a collage of images of basketball players that another poster had originally posted and the images were deleted.
I also had a post deleted and mod said it was because paedophilia (which I actually hadn’t referred to at all), cross dressing, and men in women’s spaces aren’t relevant to the trans conversation. I found that interesting. A quick search to see if other posts re cross dressing were also deleted threw up a lot of posts from other years, advice about cross dressing from cross dressers kind of thing, and they were posted in the LGBT forum.
Anyway I hope it’s ok to give the details of a message from a mod in this way, if it’s not considered ok I will of course delete this post.

One eyed Jack

Sir Oxman wrote: »

And more vitally, the essential view changes when people put the wooly thinking away for a second, put their thinking hats on and realise it's not at all what it has been presented as and the question asked reflects that in plain language -
Mind you, I'd be a bit kinder to those that virtue signal for a living because the whole ideology is deceptive as is it's fcked up parents - critical theory.
Here's a small example - something as innocuous as Miss World or Ireland - 'there would be no problem having a transwoman in the competition , sure it's 2021 <--Liveline this week by someone involved in it (a woman)
It's just so stupid, as is the belief that looks absolutely don't matter in the beauty parade (also said by that woman)
The 'sure it's 2021' line is a sign the speaker is a vacuous, annoying dolt.

Speaking of things not being what they appear to be and things being deceptive and the whole lot, to put what you’re talking about in it’s proper context at least, it was because the rules of the contest are anything but innocuous, and the “it’s 2021” was a reference to the rules of the competition, which some people do consider are completely outdated. It was being discussed on Liveline this week as a result of this -


Former contestant angry at Miss Ireland’s outdated rules about mothers


A former Miss Dublin finalist has hit out at requirements for those entering the Miss Ireland contest, which include not being a mother and being unmarried.

Blue Scannell, 19, who is currently training to be a midwife, entered this year’s competition at the end of last summer.

The Miss Ireland website includes a long list of rules of eligibility, including that potential competitors must be ‘unmarried or never have been married’, and have ‘never given birth to a child’.

Contestants must also ‘be of good character’ and ‘be a person whose background is not likely to bring into disrepute the Miss Ireland Contest, Miss Ireland brand, Miss World Contest, its titles, or its organisers’.

Gruffalux

Just to maintain clarity on language here.

From Stonewall UK's site.

TRANS
An umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth.
Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, transsexual, gender-queer (GQ), gender-fluid, non-binary, gender-variant, crossdresser, genderless, agender, nongender, third gender, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman,trans masculine, trans feminine and neutrois.

One eyed Jack

Vic_08 wrote: »

If instead of feverishly typing yet another wall of blather to describe a survey that had already been posted to the thread you actually read it, you might have noticed it was the results of TWO surveys.

Only the first question was from the poll conducted for pink news, the rest for a government contract. Coincidentally the Pink News one had a far higher lean towards trans rights than the other in relation to the same topic which just so happens to coincide with the political views Pink News strongly push.

The accusation against them of bias and propaganda is a valid one, no way should data they produce be considered to be balanced.

If you read the post I was responding to, it was Gatling who singled out Pinknews from the source I had linked to - the YouGov site where the article was posted, which included the survey in it’s original format, and not the image that ODB had provided which was hosted on an image hosting website having been modified to highlight specific parts. I noticed the asterisk in the image which made it clear that it was based upon two surveys, one from Pinknews, and the other it didn’t say, which is why in spite of your earlier suggestion that the image posted by ODB was all I needed, I still prefer to do my own research all the same, precisely to avoid bias and echo chamber groupthink.

The survey they refer to in the article was not conducted as part of any government contract btw, YouGov are nothing to do with any Government in the UK, they’re a private online survey marketing company -

About YouGov

How YouGov became the UK's best but most controversial pollster

Gatling

Gruffalux wrote: »

Just to maintain clarity on language here.

From Stonewall UK's site.

Just shows what people are dealing with ,99 genders but a woman ain't one

Invidious

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I actually think the survey shows that when it gets down to the nitty gritty, people quickly betray their vague “be kind” notions. When the ramifications of what that actually means are spelled out and we are no longer dealing with vague hypotheticals, people are much more conservative about what they are comfortable with.

This is always the case. It's classic NIMBY-ism. It's great to support something in the abstract until it actually starts to interfere with your real life.

For instance, many supporters of trans women in sports would like to see their own daughter go up against a male-bodied trans boxer? And yet it's grand to risk other women's safety as long as it's abstract and disconnected from their reality.

Cestmoi 111

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2021/02/why-using-gender-neutral-language-risks-excluding-one-minority-group-include
A recent article on gender neutral language in maternity care; I found it well reasoned and well written.

The search that I mentioned earlier for a certain term on boards.ie brought me down a bit of a rabbit hole on old posts about trans issues. Interestingly there was initial resistance against including the T in the LGB forum, it received a lot of pushback. It was largely touted by one particular trans poster who had a very aggressive posting style and seemed to pi$$ off everyone, including other trans posters. They posted in a very inflammatory way which got everyone's backs up and some of the threads were quite vicious. Looking at some of the threads from 2007 it's clear that acceptance of transpeople has come a long way. Some of the comments made to this trans poster were really horrible and I don't think they'd be said now, or if they were, they certainly would no longer be tolerated by the majority of posters or by moderators. Just a little observation.

Invidious

Cestmoi 111 wrote: »

It was largely touted by one particular trans poster who had a very aggressive posting style and seemed to pi$$ off everyone, including other trans posters. They posted in a very inflammatory way which got everyone's backs up and some of the threads were quite vicious. Looking at some of the threads from 2007 it's clear that acceptance of transpeople has come a long way. Some of the comments made to this trans poster were really horrible and I don't think they'd be said now, or if they were, they certainly would no longer be tolerated by the majority of posters or by moderators. Just a little observation.

It sounds like this poster set out to provoke hostility, so is it really that surprising that they attracted such comments? I haven't read the threads in question, but imagine the responses had more to do with the poster being a dick than with them being targeted for being trans.

Gatling

Invidious wrote: »

It sounds like this poster set out to provoke hostility, so is it really that surprising that they attracted such comments? I haven't read the threads in question, but imagine the responses had more to do with the poster being a dick than with them being targeted for being trans.[/QUOTE

This is usually the case with trolls , inflame a thread then look for pity based off being something , little victim syndrome,