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

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

Next Greebo will be telling us we have to split the lesbians and the gay men because he played a game of.spot the difference and found one.

Then he will try and split the gay men into groups based on heights.

He won't be happy until theres approximately until there's.millions of separate groups each consisting of one person (he spotted that they had different fingerprints so of course they could have nothing in common).

Yes, that it entirely. I'm the crazy person for believing there are two sexes and two, matching genders.

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

I know. I'm glad we finally agree on this.

So a trans women cannot be the same as a biological woman, otherwise both would need a GRC before they are treated the same legally. Thanks for finally confirming that for us.

GreeBo

Gentlemanne wrote: »

This is unbelievably obtuse lol. If you want to make arguments from arithmetic then we should pull out a venn diagram to teach you about overlapping statuses.

Also, of course sexuality and gender are not literally identical but about 99% of serious people understand why they are a part of LGBT.

99% of all people? Really, can you provide any evidence of that?
Perhaps you mean 99% of trans people..

GreeBo

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Surely you’re capable of being reasonable? I don’t use the term myself, but I can understand why the people who do use it, use it in reference to the distinction between cisgender and transgender as those terms relate to gender - they’re opposites of each other.

Female and transfemale are also opposites, cis is not required.
Cis female is the same as "ABS brakes" or "ATM machine", its redundant.

One eyed Jack

GreeBo wrote: »

Female and transfemale are also opposites, cis is not required.
Cis female is the same as "ABS brakes" or "ATM machine", its redundant.

Framing it that way suggests that while both are female, the distinction between them is that one is cis, and one is trans. The terms are only redundant in the sense that you’ve a better chance of being hit by a bus than the chances of ever having to refer to anyone as either cis or trans, but if you were for example a sexologist, the terms may be relevant and used regularly among your colleagues -


German sexologist Volkmar Sigusch used the neologism cissexual (zissexuell in German) in a peer-reviewed publication. In his 1998 essay "The Neosexual Revolution", he cites his two-part 1991 article "Die Transsexuellen und unser nosomorpher Blick" ("Transsexuals and our nosomorphic view") as the origin of the term.


Outside of that, the chances you might ever have to use the terms are vanishingly unlikely and are being made out to be far more of an impediment in human interactions than they are in reality. You’re making the point that you shouldn’t have to believe something as though anyone can actually compel you to believe something you don’t. Doesn’t that same standard then apply to everyone and not just you? Nobody can be compelled to believe something they don’t, but they can be compelled by law or by the rules or culture of an organisation or entity to not be a dick about it.

Gruffalux

Bliss Female. How I identify and my preferred form of address, going forwards. Thank you all in advance.

Cestmoi 111

About the claims that the T is inextricably linked with LGB and has until now been accepted as such...

Below I’ve linked to two threads from 2007 when merging the T with LGB on Boards was proposed. You can clearly see the support or otherwise for the proposals and also the reasons, from trans people, as to whether they are linked or not.
The first thread proposed demanded a name change to add the T and received practically no support, including from other trans posters.

The second thread proposed the intro of a transgender forum. This initially received widespread support from many, including trans posters, particularly if it took the following structure:
introduce a new sub-category labelled something like "Sexuality & Sexual Identity"off of Soc, containing three fora:
* Lesbian & Gay & Bisexual
* Transgender
* Sex and Sexuality (Private)

The thread quickly took a crazy turn with trans posters making accusations about each other and doxxing each other on various trans websites! Hilariously most trans posters insisted that such a forum could not have a trans mod as they couldn’t be trusted to be fair!
The very angry poster who had made the previous demand for the name change joined and vociferously argued against a trans forum. They then constantly insulted posters and mods (received a load of insults too, it wasn’t one way) who were in support of the forum. After all the shenanigans, most posters withdrew their support for the proposal. The punchline is that the very angry poster then insisted this forum should indeed be created but only if they were moderator, because “If you want me to shut up, this is the best way of doing it.”:D

One post around the same time (2007) quoted from Wiki, here’s the entry at that time:
——————
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lgbt#Controversy (the entry is v different now).
The term LGBT is controversial. For example, some transgender and transsexual people do not like the term because they do not believe their cause is the same as that of LGB people; they may also object when an organisation adds a T to their initialism or acronym when the level of service they actually offer to trans people is questionable. There are also LGB people who don't like the T for the same or similar reasons.

Many people also believe that a sharp distinction should be drawn between sexual orientation and gender identity. GLB concerns the former; TTI concerns the latter.
———————————-

I’ve quoted below some of the comments from trans people, both for and against the proposals.
The comments will give a bit of insight if you don’t want to read the full threads (and all the bile therein). Comments not necessarily in original order. The next bit is long so stop reading here if not interested in the comments from older threads.

June 2007
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055109175
Initial poster R
LGB forum needs to change it's name.

It's a disgrace. I don't know of any other forum of it's type that labels itsself as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual. If you're naming it along those lines, it should be LGBT. I don't care if it's in the charter. The name is what matters. Anytime I've tried to get them to change it, I've been met with nothing but personal criticism. No valid reasoning as to why the name continually excludes transgenders.

It's an issue of discrimination
The fact is, that if T does not recieve support from the LGB, who ARE they going to recieve support from? They are not a strong enough entity on their own, such a small minority. They'd be stamped over.

The reasons why they go in with LGB and not some other random grouping is that their experiences are ridiculous similar, but much, much worse in the case of Ts. They suffer the same kind of discrimination. Most people don't care that Ts aren't technically G - they'll still shove them in the same box. It is not "giving in" to group similiarly - as LGBT grouping together is, or should be, all about defying discrimination. Ireland seems to be the one country that doesn't get this, it seems to think that it's just some sort of chat group. It's not.

Both LGB and T are about defying gender conventions. They are taking a wild U-Turn from what has historically been the role of sex and gender, and even if that's forgotten, still doing it very different to the majority. Just because one is about preference for another person's gender instead of your own gender does not make them so different.

Biologically, they are also believed to be caused by very similiar things - mostly likely abnormal hormonal bursts in the womb.

Ts are very often LGB within themselves, showing an even stronger biological connection too.

There really is a very, very strong argument as to why T goes with LGBT. It's ****ing pathetic that the people in this topic think they have a real majority - they don't. Most forums go with LGBT, for the reasons I have stated, and because despite some tiffs, it just makes sense as it's the "same sort of thing" even if it's got a different emphasis.

If T breaks from LGB, we recieve next to NO support. And that's exactly what happened in the LGB forum here.

This is unforgivable. You'll notice i haven't been as aggressive in this post, but I still firmly believe the people involved deserve every bit of bile in my stomach.

This is wrong. It has to change. Ts need to be recognised and not sidelined anymore. I don't care for what you claim or who you claim to know and love regarding Ts, action is what matters here.

If the LGB here does not fully recognise T, this site as a whole should be blacklisted as Transphobic, as being against progression, being viciously conservative, conformist, and apathetic.

EG
However, there are those of us who realize that putting up a big stink and trying to force people to accept us isn't the way to go. Sticking the T on LGB has always been a strange marriage to begin with, as sexual orientation and identity are very different things (though a lot of trans people identify as LGB).

F
As stated in l.g.b thread I don't honestly believe that l.g.b and T share that much common ground. I say that as an identifying Trans person myself...the difference is very considerable....and therefore I don't feel that T has any divine right, nor is it arguably appropriate, to be included in the L.G.B title. Is it that T is too weak to stand on it's own that it needs the shield of L.G and B? Yes I believe that this probably is the case. We are a numericaly very weak group...But that does not in my eyes necessitate an umbolilical cord to a disparate L.G. and B. T is separate and I don't view it as discrimination for it not to be included in the forum title.

July 2007
Transgender Forum
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=53697706

F
Perhaps it could be expanded to include Transvestite/Gender Queer and Questioning? ..would increase the scope and likely level of participants.

R (originator of previous thread)
This isn't going to work.

The fact is, that most people "reason out" that LGB and T do not belong together. However, the majority of people behind LGBT forums have reasoned otherwise. Why do people not realise that this is almost definitely because of differing social trends, and the fact that most people posting don't even have a clue about the T or in some cases the LGB? Why should they get a say?

I am very much opposed to the forming of a T forum here. If i had to, I would rather set my own up off board.

Of course, I'm not interested in a moderating a T forum here since I'm not interested in a T forum.

A select few of the mods here are outright bigots as a recent thread I made showed, it is a disgrace they did not have their positions at least temporarily removed immediately.

The fact is that the LGB refuses to officially recognise the T in it's title. The thing here is that while it doesn't seem that important since it proports to deal with T issues, the very act of refusing to add it when asked to, and proudly flaunting the fact that they don't have to, is insulting in of itself.

Honestly, would it piss anyone off if the forum was called LGBT? No. But it pisses me and a few others off that it isn't. That is how you weigh things up when you make decisions. It would not hurt anyone to make this decision, but it would please some people immensely.

I have no idea why there is so much resistance to a simple name change. There is nothing wrong with being vehemently disappointed at such a lack of respect and recognition.

The majority of other places include the T. Do you really think us clever Irish are going to be the ones that finally figure out they don't in fact belong together?

This is nothing but a bunch of people thinking they're more clever than all the other LGBT forums, and don't give a crap about who it's discriminating against. They're only doing it out of arrogance and to get my goat. They couldn't care less about what's proper to do.

Because the current definition of the grouping is LGBT on a global scale, this does count as discrimination relative to what it should be. You are not providing for the minority that other institutions of this type.

The reasons given aren't good enough because they don't really take into account the fact that it's defined as LGBT. You're not just arguing why the T shouldn't belong there, you're also arguing as to why what it's been defined by people considerably more intelligent than the twats running the LGB forum here have made a mistake.

(R later insists they moderate the transgender forum).

SG
I think a forum would be a good idea.

As for a Mod, I think perhaps it would be good idea to have someone who is not GID to mod it. Someone who would be willing to learn about the different groups/stakeholders/variations/meanings etc. Any apply that understanding in clear-cut clinical manner.
The reason being is that any GID mod selected will be accused of bias and unfairness. On ever single GID/Transgender/Transsexual and every other trans in-between forum/group I have every been on always, to a T (excuse the pun), end up with verbal fistfights about definitions and what not.

personally, I feel that someone from outside the 'community' would be a better solution to having someone from within to mod such a forum, if it was created. The infighting and difference of opinion that exists is unfortunate. And the expression of such differences result in vitriol and vicious personal attacks where are all sense and sensibility is thrown out the window.

K
I think it'd be a good idea to have a forum for Trans issues because, as alot have pointed out, it doesn't come under the LGB spectrum.

A non TS mod would be a better choice since they can be non bias and not influenced by dealings with the same posters on different TS sites or opposing opinions on TS issues.

F
I am no longer interested in Moderating. I do not wish to work with the T-S people who are presenting themselves here.

K re moderator
We are not capable of that non-bias when it comes to this subject.


K then used their own website to bring in new posters to support the idea of the forum. After this didn’t go down so well they posted:
Seriously I give up, 4 days of this **** of constantly having to reply and in essence justify our existance.

And posted this on their own blog:
Ok new rules, anyone coming here from Boards.ie to quote me and spew ****e I don't ****ing care, I wash my hands ofit because I don't think a TS forum would work on Boards. After what you's did to me I can only imagine what would happen to a new out TS and you's are meant to be the more enlightened ones, I dread to think what the homophobes are like since in our case even gays are transphobes so we get all your ****. I'm glad you all have a group you can unite against, sort of like Hitler and Mussolini but without the charm.

At this stage K no longer supports the proposed forum and says:

Trust me when I say this, they won't come, I'll make sure of that. This is not an environment that I think will help and as such will activily work to destroy any forum created that I consider to be destructive in the long run. I'm not going to let something happen that I feel will, in the end, cause more harm than good. This is not an environment for a TS forum.

CC
A public boards.ie Transgender forum is a really bad idea.
Too much agro, too much infighting, too little too late.

LLMMLL

Here are the first 3 posts from that thread, not even being selective they are literally the first 3 responses:

"a roze by any other name would want to chop it's testicles off"

"Someone please give this chick a serious deep dickin"

"Go start your own forum with transgender blackjack and transgender hookers."

Do you think the above is representative of cis people on boards?

If not then why do you think you can use individual boards posts as representative of trans people?

LLMMLL

GreeBo wrote: »

Fantastic, so then why am I forced to use what I believe are the incorrect pronouns towards trans people if it's internal? I'm not forced to treat gay people differently than straight people, why are trans people special?

Because your beliefs are not special. Nobody actually cares what you believe. If you believed that everyone should be called "she" regardless of biology or gender identity you'd swiftly get into trouble at work etc. Call you male colleagues "she" repeatedly and see what happens.

You are actually being asked (not forced) to do what you are always asked (not forced) to do. Be polite to people, regardless of your belief system.

For example, there are still people who believe that black people are less intelligent, that gay people are deviants etc.

By your egocentric standards their belief system trumps all and they should be allowed to treat people however they like.

Thankfully pretty much nobody agrees with you that the world should work this way.

LLMMLL

GreeBo wrote: »

So a trans women cannot be the same as a biological woman, otherwise both would need a GRC before they are treated the same legally. Thanks for finally confirming that for us.

Who said they are the same? I say Both cis women and trans women are women.

A cis male and cis female are both human. But they are different. But still both human.

Gatling

And if someone sets up a lesbian ,gay and bisexual forum they are entitled to do so ,
Which is what happened ......

Ancient history now

Gatling

LLMMLL wrote: »

A cis male and cis female are both human. But they are different. But still both human.

No were all human divided into two categories men and women .
That's never going to change ,no matter how many acronym woke types make up to put in front of man and woman

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

Who said they are the same? I say Both cis women and trans women are women.

A cis male and cis female are both human. But they are different. But still both human.

Great, we are really making progress lately. So a woman and a transwoman are not the same. Excellent.
So what makes the different?

LLMMLL wrote: »

If you believed that everyone should be called "she" regardless of biology

Hang about, I thought biology was irrelevant and it was down to what the person identified as?

LLMMLL wrote: »

You are actually being asked (not forced) to do what you are always asked (not forced) to do. Be polite to people, regardless of your belief system.

For example, there are still people who believe that black people are less intelligent, that gay people are deviants etc.

By your egocentric standards their belief system trumps all and they should be allowed to treat people however they like.

Thankfully pretty much nobody agrees with you that the world should work this way.

Nice.
So you think I should be free to politely refer to those persons who were born male as men, irrespective of what gender they currently are claiming?

Gruffalux

Mod snip: deliberately inflammatory and contains quotes without any sort of context whatsoever

GreeBo

"The assimilation of any erotic image is, by nature, female"
WTAF?

So trans-men can no longer assimilate erotica and biological men never could? I despair.

CtevenSrowder

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Certainly they will do if those are the relevant terms, and as well defined as they are already, we would still need to use trans/cis to distinguish between people who are transgender and people who are cisgender. I don’t think gender and sex are the same thing either, but I understand that most people in my experience at least tend to use the two different concepts interchangeably to refer to the same thing. I’ll still understand what someone means regardless of whatever terminology they’re using, that understanding is based upon the context in which the words are used, and not the individual words themselves.

It’s why I detest the sort of language policing going on in this thread which really isn’t representative of most people’s reality. Thankfully for society at large the language police are a tiny minority who inhabit the virtual world with no real power to compel people to adjust their use of language or police how people communicate or express themselves differently.

No-one's policing language, people can use whatever words they want to refer to whatever they want, it makes for poor debate however when words are not clearly defined or have common meaning amongst those having the debate. It's worse when no clarification is forthcoming that isn't based in circular logic (a women is a women, or complete obfuscation that makes nothing clearer (tables of exemplars). Some will point out that that certain usage is simply incorrect, and laugh at what is clearly made up ideological language. Cis-male is a pleonasm.

And by the by, the term trans-female was initially brought into the discussion to describe a male was trans (a trans-women) in one of the other trans-threads, when a certain poster was running around in circles trying to give their definition of what a women is (still have no idea what it is btw), and maybe not used quite as you thought (to describe a trans-man).

I'll leave it here, you can have the last word on it:)

Natterjack from Kerry

GreeBo wrote: »

So you think I should be free to politely refer to those persons who were born male as men, irrespective of what gender they currently are claiming?

You can do so, but I wouldn't consider it polite to do so in most cases, where you may as well comply with their preference. Why not? It's not that you don't still think that they are a man, but that doesn't mean you have to say it out loud.

Cestmoi 111

My god Gruffalux. Where’s the puking emoji?

Gruffalux

Cestmoi 111 wrote: »

My god Gruffalux. Where’s the puking emoji?

I think there is a more serious element to this than just puking - though i know what you mean. Even if this were a fringe element it should be shut down or shunned by right-thinking people as sowing seeds of misogyny and violence. But it is not fringe - these are prominent speakers who get clapped on. That is what amazes me.

GreeBo

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

You can do so, but I wouldn't consider it polite to do so in most cases, where you may as well comply with their preference. Why not? It's not that you don't still think that they are a man, but that doesn't mean you have to say it out loud.

Which would be fine, right up until they want to enter the changing room with my daughter.

LLMMLL

GreeBo wrote: »

Great, we are really making progress lately. So a woman and a transwoman are not the same. Excellent.
So what makes the different?

Chromosomes.

Hang about, I thought biology was irrelevant and it was down to what the person identified as?

What are you talking about now? I said IF to highlight a hypothetical example of you calling cis men "she". The hypothetical exams has no impact as to whether biology is relevant or irrelevant.

Nice.
So you think I should be free to politely refer to those persons who were born male as men, irrespective of what gender they currently are claiming?

You are free. But will get disciplined in many companies, carded on boards, held in contempt of you do it in a court case, etc.

Natterjack from Kerry

GreeBo wrote: »

Which would be fine, right up until they want to enter the changing room with my daughter.

Fully agree. Thats when reality has to take precedence over the pretence. And trans people need to be on board with that too - pronouns, or calling them a male of female name, are perfectly reasonable for the rest of society to go along with their wishes, but there is only so far people are going to go with, in effect, playing along with someone's trans fantasy. And yes, the locker room example crosses the line.

Natterjack from Kerry

LLMMLL wrote: »

You are free. But will get disciplined in many companies, carded on boards, held in contempt of you do it in a court case, etc.

It shouldnt take the law or anything else to police civility. Anyone not complying with the wishes of the trans person in those circumstances is just a rude insensitive oik. These are essentially trivial cases, with no excuse for not complying with someone's wishes.

CtevenSrowder

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

It shouldnt take the law or anything else to police civility. Anyone not complying with the wishes of the trans person in those circumstances is just a rude insensitive oik. These are essentially trivial cases, with no excuse for not complying with someone's wishes.

Well, with regards to being in contempt of court, I believe this arose when a (alleged)* victim of rape refused to refer to her (alleged*) rapist as she (they were a pre-op trans male), and was told if they didn't they would be held in contempt of court.

Certain posters here view this as being perfectly fine (compelled speech), and would potentially accuse the supposed rape victim as throwing trans-people under the bus. But there you are.

*I'm unsire as to the outcome of the case

LLMMLL

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

It shouldnt take the law or anything else to police civility. Anyone not complying with the wishes of the trans person in those circumstances is just a rude insensitive oik. These are essentially trivial cases, with no excuse for not complying with someone's wishes.

You don't think a company has the right to police civility to other employees?

Do you really believe that?

Bannasidhe

Murdered, Suffocated And Burned Alive – 350 Transgender People Killed In 2020

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewareham/2020/11/11/350-transgender-people-have-been-murdered-in-2020-transgender-day-of-remembrance-list/?sh=5ddd326f65a6

BURNED ALIVE.

Think about that.

BURNED. ALIVE.

If you all are comfortable being on the same side of a 'debate' with those who burn people alive I hope, for their sake, no member of your family or any of your friends ever comes out at Transgender.
Particularly those of you sharing inflammatory content that plays right into the hands of those who murder transgender people for the 'crime' of being transgender.

The list shows that this year the average age of those killed was 31, with the youngest just 15.

While a fifth (22%) of the transgender people murdered were killed inside their own house.

I'm out of this thread.

I'll not lend credence to this being a balanced discussion by participating in it any longer.

Gruffalux

Bannasidhe wrote: »

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewareham/2020/11/11/350-transgender-people-have-been-murdered-in-2020-transgender-day-of-remembrance-list/?sh=5ddd326f65a6

BURNED ALIVE.

Think about that.

BURNED. ALIVE.

If you all are comfortable being on the same side of a 'debate' with those who burn people alive I hope, for their sake, no member of your family or any of your friends ever comes out at Transgender.
Particularly those of you sharing inflammatory content that plays right into the hands of those who murder transgender people for the 'crime' of being transgender.




I'm out of this thread.

I'll not lend credence to this being a balanced discussion by participating in it any longer.

You accuse posters who disagree with gender theory ideology of being on the same side of the debate as people who burn other people alive. You associate them directly with vile murderers.

jam_mac_jam

I wonder how many women are killed or burned or suffocated every year. I wouldn't want to be on that "side".

I wonder is it the same demographic that kills trans people?

Is any of that relevant because we don't know the reasons for the murders of any of them.

Gruffalux

Im speechless.

LLMMLL

Bannasidhe wrote: »

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewareham/2020/11/11/350-transgender-people-have-been-murdered-in-2020-transgender-day-of-remembrance-list/?sh=5ddd326f65a6

BURNED ALIVE.

Think about that.

BURNED. ALIVE.

If you all are comfortable being on the same side of a 'debate' with those who burn people alive I hope, for their sake, no member of your family or any of your friends ever comes out at Transgender.
Particularly those of you sharing inflammatory content that plays right into the hands of those who murder transgender people for the 'crime' of being transgender..

That is truly horrific what these trans people face.

If people would stop stoking up so much hate against them perhaps we could make some progress. Unfortunately this thread can sap your hope of living in a more civil society

Take care of yourself Bannasidhe.