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

CtevenSrowder

IAMAMORON wrote: »

How could you possibly know?

How do you know a non-trans person doesn't know what it feels like to be trans? (hint: the answer to these two questions are essentially the same )

nobody knows what anyone else feels, thats not how world perspective works

its pointless to speculate one way or the other

but, if you have just spent all day arguing it one way, and you then act utterly bewildered at the same concept when it's sent back to you, its impossible to believe you are arguing in good faith tbh

i think these threads really only have value when the extremist views are set to one side and people have real discussion about the actual issues (and thats not necessarily the jail, perv, murderer etc examples either, as ive said)

km991148

[Deleted User] wrote: »

i think these threads really only have value when the extremist views are set to one side and people have real discussion about the actual issues (and thats not necessarily the jail, perv, murderer etc examples either, as ive said)

I've cut the parts of the quote I disagree with, but definitely too much of this (focusing on extremes or contrived examples).

I've yet to see that much about the thread title - ie the day to day life (current situation in modern Ireland), extremes aside (and no that's not to deny people living with these extremes as a harsh reality, nor am I trying to belittle those extreme situations in any way).

Frankie Machine

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I never said I I am in a position to understand how transsexuals or transgendered persons feel or how they associate their gender or their lives. I am non transgender so I would never dare to question their own existence. Although I will strive to empathise with it.

As I keep iterating time and time again, non transgenders simply have no notion of what it feels like. Which begs the obvious question of why they feel they should have such strong feelings against it?

If you don't know what you are arguing against how can you possibly have a valid argument? It is akin to sexual discrimination which homosexuals received in the past.

It is so easy to isolate the general dissension amongst posters. The same mantra remains, about 50 odd cheating sportspersons are the odd unique example of a raving psychotic in an asylum in the UK basically being used as the anti liberal sniggering icon of a Guardian journalist hell bent on creating some sort of divisive political debate.

Whereas the answer is and should be that humans have the right the express their own gender and other persons don't have the right to enforce a gender upon them.

There is a huge difference between recognition of identity and conferral of rights.

You don't even seem to want to apply any critical faculties to this thing. You want to cop out of making a judgement about whether a claim is genuine, or fake, or exaggerated, or cynical... by saying that you're not in a position to decide one way or another. 'Striving to empathise' in an uncritical way is just Pontius Pilate stuff.

Your final paragraph is yet more of the same. You have the right to express yourself any way you like, but I am not obliged to buy into it.

And other people are not required to meekly surrender their rights either in order to accommodate something that would encroach on those.

Because rights have always been contested. That should tell you something.

suicide_circus

If transgender people are to reach the promised land in which no one bats an eyelid, society needs to able to ask questions and iron thing out.

Gruffalux

Deleted User wrote: »

i think these threads really only have value when the extremist views are set to one side and people have real discussion about the actual issues (and thats not necessarily the jail, perv, murderer etc examples either, as ive said)

Prison issues are an important part of the discussion.
Safeguarding in intimate spaces is an important part of the discussion.
It is at the extremes, or stress points shall we call them more usefully, that an ideological position is tested.

km991148

Gruffalux wrote: »

Prison issues are an important part of the discussion.
Safeguarding in intimate spaces is an important part of the discussion.
It is at the extremes, or stress points shall we call them more usefully, that an ideological position is tested.

Maybe the prison cases with all that goes with it (general protection of population, the apparent higher percentage of transgender in the prison population and so on) merits it's own thread? It's (prison) a very specific area of society anyway (not without many of its own problems).

jam_mac_jam

Gruffalux wrote: »

Prison issues are an important part of the discussion.
Safeguarding in intimate spaces is an important part of the discussion.
It is at the extremes, or stress points shall we call them more usefully, that an ideological position is tested.

Its also the extremes that are going to concern people or raise the differences.

Nobody cares if a trans woman is in a coffee shop or works with you but a domestic violence shelter or a rape crisis centre people's sex becomes more relevant.

However those concerns are described as extreme or not enough examples, not happening in Ireland.

Gruffalux

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Its also the extremes that are going to concern people or raise the differences.

Nobody cares if a trans woman is in a coffee shop or works with you but a domestic violence shelter or a rape crisis centre people's sex becomes more relevant.

However those concerns are described as extreme or not enough examples, not happening in Ireland.

Yes. And the stress points test the fundamental tenets of gender theory. In jail or in a shared dorm in a rape crises shelter it starts to matter when people try to make you believe that identification literally changes biological reality. No one cares at the disco. But waiting for the starting gun in a field race where de facto males run against females it is impossible to swallow transubstantiation.

km991148

But these extremes overlap with existing problems. This is where it gets complicated.
Prison rape/sexual assault (for example) is a very real problem on its own.

IAMAMORON

Frankie Machine wrote: »

There is a huge difference between recognition of identity and conferral of rights.

You don't even seem to want to apply any critical faculties to this thing. You want to cop out of making a judgement about whether a claim is genuine, or fake, or exaggerated, or cynical... by saying that you're not in a position to decide one way or another. 'Striving to empathise' in an uncritical way is just Pontius Pilate stuff.

Your final paragraph is yet more of the same. You have the right to express yourself any way you like, but I am not obliged to buy into it.

And other people are not required to meekly surrender their rights either in order to accommodate something that would encroach on those.

Because rights have always been contested. That should tell you something.

So basically just because they are seeking recognition on an equal basis that they don't get to achieve recognition because they are declaring their own gender?

This goes back to the basic human rights being discussed pages ago?

What gives non transgenders preference over the rights of transgenders?

There is no quid pro quo available the last time I looked. Which is back to the entire crux of every argument I am making concerning the human rights of transsexuals. There is this constant underlying tone that just because they are sexually transitioning that somehow they are thus exposing their human rights to the rights of other persons? As I said there is no quid pro quo involved here, we are all born with human rights regardless of our gender.

Pontius Pilot my eye by the way, no one is here to be patronised either? I would prefer it if you could keep Roman Palestinian overlords out of general discussion going forward, in fact I would categorically advise it.

" Conferral of rights " - I am looking forward to this one.

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

So basically just because they are seeking recognition on an equal basis that they don't get to achieve recognition because they are declaring their own gender?

This goes back to the basic human rights being discussed pages ago?

What gives non transgenders preference over the rights of transgenders?

There is no quid pro quo available the last time I looked. Which is back to the entire crux of every argument I am making concerning the human rights of transsexuals. There is this constant underlying tone that just because they are sexually transitioning that somehow they are thus exposing their human rights to the rights of other persons? As I said there is no quid pro quo involved here, we are all born with human rights regardless of our gender.

Pontius Pilot my eye by the way, no one is here to be patronised either? I would prefer it if you could keep Roman Palestinian overlords out of general discussion going forward, in fact I would categorically advise it.

" Conferral of rights " - I am looking forward to this one.

big long post for someone who hasnt set out a single example of what human rights he is claiming dont exist for transgender people.

specifics, for the thirtieth time?

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

So basically just because they are seeking recognition on an equal basis that they don't get to achieve recognition because they are declaring their own gender?

This goes back to the basic human rights being discussed pages ago?

What gives non transgenders preference over the rights of transgenders?

There is no quid pro quo available the last time I looked. Which is back to the entire crux of every argument I am making concerning the human rights of transsexuals. There is this constant underlying tone that just because they are sexually transitioning that somehow they are thus exposing their human rights to the rights of other persons? As I said there is no quid pro quo involved here, we are all born with human rights regardless of our gender.

" Conferral of rights " - I am looking forward to this one.

Your argument is circling the drain. Not much left in it at this stage.

You keep repeating the same point, that transgender people are somehow being denied the right to express themselves as their preferred gender.

Many have told you, no one really gives one what way someone chooses to express their identity.

*until*
It becomes a problem when a nonsense is insisted on fact, biology and physiology are denied and the rights of others are adversely affected.

And around in a circle we go.

Maybe you could list these bigots unilaterally denying all rights of trans people, so we can denounce them together?

Ted_YNWA

IAMAMORON wrote: »

So basically just because they are seeking recognition on an equal basis that they don't get to achieve recognition because they are declaring their own gender?

This goes back to the basic human rights being discussed pages ago?

What gives non transgenders preference over the rights of transgenders?

There is no quid pro quo available the last time I looked. Which is back to the entire crux of every argument I am making concerning the human rights of transsexuals. There is this constant underlying tone that just because they are sexually transitioning that somehow they are thus exposing their human rights to the rights of other persons? As I said there is no quid pro quo involved here, we are all born with human rights regardless of our gender.

Pontius Pilot my eye by the way, no one is here to be patronised either? I would prefer it if you could keep Roman Palestinian overlords out of general discussion going forward, in fact I would categorically advise it.

" Conferral of rights " - I am looking forward to this one.

And the mods would advise to leave what is/isn't allowed in the general discussion to them.

If you feel someone has drifted too far off topic, report it & we will deal with it

suicide_circus

IAMAMORON wrote: »

So basically just because they are seeking recognition on an equal basis that they don't get to achieve recognition because they are declaring their own gender?

Seeking recognition of something which is at odds with vast majority of people's understanding of how biology works is a fairly big ask. It's a significant question for society to grapple with and may take some time.

46 Long

Frankie Machine

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Pontius Pilot my eye by the way, no one is here to be patronised either? I would prefer it if you could keep Roman Palestinian overlords out of general discussion going forward, in fact I would categorically advise it.

" Conferral of rights " - I am looking forward to this one.

Not sure why you are so offended by the PP reference, it's just a figure of speech.

Not sure either why 'conferral of rights' is causing you some angst. Pretty standard use of English, I'd have thought.

But I detect in your casual reference to the human rights that we are all born with, that you are unaware of how aspirational, and how contested, that notion is.

John Hutton

I see they chased Suzanne Moore out of the Guardian for daring to ever so slightly question the trans agenda.

Wibbs

Frankie Machine wrote: »

You don't even seem to want to apply any critical faculties to this thing. You want to cop out of making a judgement about whether a claim is genuine, or fake, or exaggerated, or cynical... by saying that you're not in a position to decide one way or another. 'Striving to empathise' in an uncritical way is just Pontius Pilate stuff.

It comes back to what I reckoned on another thread: Intersectionality is the ultimate pseudointellectual fence sitting bullsh1te. It leaves the believer or group free to make no judgements whatsoever.

No judgement means it relieves the individual or group of having to think and of course it relieves the individual or group of taking the responsibility of making a judgement. They can never be blamed, or be at fault and can never be quite wrong or quite right. Free to wash their hands of the responsibility as it were. The ultimate get out clause for avoiding thinking too hard beyond the catechism de jour, which paints with a wide brush the oppressor and the oppressed in broad and clumsy strokes and facts be damned. Well facts means you have to take one position or other. Lord no. It is the refuge of the dithering, the indecisive and ultimately the cowardly.

It is all too common these days in some areas of Western thought. There is always some equivalence going on, cultural, gender, whateveritisyourehavingyourself. [insert oppressed group here] did something terrible. Well [insert oppressor group here] did worse in the past. A handy way to avoid growing a pair, making a decision and standing for much of anything beyond some nebulous and oft patronising "kindness" towards the "oppressed" in question, wrapped in cognitive dissonance. That isn't a kindness at all.

Gender is a social construct. Oh wait it isn't. Men can have vaginas. Women can have penises. Let's just accept this, because feelings. No judgement. Please god(more likely gods, goddesses, or spaghetti monsters) spare us from that.

IAMAMORON

Frankie Machine wrote: »

Not sure why you are so offended by the PP reference, it's just a figure of speech.

Not sure either why 'conferral of rights' is causing you some angst. Pretty standard use of English, I'd have thought.

But I detect in your casual reference to the human rights that we are all born with, that you are unaware of how aspirational, and how contested, that notion is.

I am not so sure what you are getting at ... at all.

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

If transgender people are to reach the promised land in which no one bats an eyelid, society needs to able to ask questions and iron thing out.

This is it

There seems to be a near endless list of terms/words etc about it.


Where as,at end of a day,if some lad wants to dress/act/identify as a women and vice versa female to male......

So long as they arent forcing their views on anyone else/making nonsense of some subjects/situations*/breaking laws,let em at it



*example: (trans-lesbians,is irredemably a faulty position,if someone deosnt want to go out with you,screaming transphone,isnt going to convince em)

It's handy that if someone does decide to download the PDF and

solemnly and sincerely declare that I
(i) have a settled and solemn intention to live in the preferred gender of
male/female (delete as appropriate) for the rest of my life

that they can potentially act the maggot for a bit and then when they get tired of it can download another handy PDF and

solemnly and sincerely declare that I
(i) have a settled and solemn intention to live in my original gender of
male/female (delete as appropriate) for the rest of my life

State-sponsored see-how-the-other-half-lives, literally. No harm, no foul.

suicide_circus

Is that allowed? Can you do multiple gender declarations back and forth?

ingalway

Deleted User wrote: »

This is it

There seems to be a near endless list of terms/words etc about it.


Where as,at end of a day,if some lad wants to dress/act/identify as a women and vice versa female to male......

So long as they arent forcing their views on anyone else/making nonsense of some subjects/situations*/breaking laws,let em at it



*example: (trans-lesbians,is irredemably a faulty position,if someone deosnt want to go out with you,screaming transphone,isnt going to convince em)

But it's not as simple as "at end of a day,if some lad wants to dress/act/identify as a women and vice versa female to male......"

Some lad who declares that he's female can start wandering into female toilets, changing rooms, showers, dorms, hospital wards and prisons. That same lad can also enter into womens sports - very few women, even at the highest level, can compete against a fairly average male. Women will not only lose out in the sports they have trained hard in but also face a real risk of serious injury.

Females to males pose not threat of violence or rape to males and will not be winning any sports competitions against them anytime soon.

It all sounds so lovely and easy "to let em at it" - if only all the uppity women would just pipe down, be kind and let em at it the world would be a much better place.

Not for women it wouldn't.

ingalway

Deleted User wrote: »

big long post for someone who hasnt set out a single example of what human rights he is claiming dont exist for transgender people.

specifics, for the thirtieth time?

I've asked him that question - it is NEVER answered.

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

Is that allowed? Can you do multiple gender declarations back and forth?

I haven't bothered to read the whole thread but 2 mins of google searching gives me this - the forms are at the bottom.

https://www.gov.ie/en/service/b55abf-gender-recognition-certificate/

Client Identity Services
Address:Department of Social Protection, Shannon Lodge, Carrick-on-Shannon , Co. Leitrim
Phone number:071 9672588
If you are issued with a Gender Recognition Certificate, your gender (and name - if changed) will be updated on the record associated with your Personal Public Service (PPS) Number on the department’s central records database.

If you require an amendment to a Gender Recognition Certificate please use form GRC2 (below) or to Revoke an existing Gender Recognition Certificate, please use form GRC3 (below).

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

Is that allowed? Can you do multiple gender declarations back and forth?

How could you not be able to? That's what's so ****ing bizarre and unbelievable.

Rodin

mohawk wrote: »

Transsexual is no longer the accepted term when referring to transgender people. Your use of such a word would indicate that you haven’t read much about the topic.
I and others on the thread use the words trans or transgender as they are the terms preferred by trans people themselves.

I ( and I think the majority of others) prefer the terms man/woman/male/female to also be respected.

After all, shouldn't all rights/feelings be respected... not this "my rights are more important than your rights" that we see a loud minority promoting.

ingalway

ingalway wrote: »

But it's not as simple as "at end of a day,if some lad wants to dress/act/identify as a women and vice versa female to male......"

Some lad who declares that he's female can start wandering into female toilets, changing rooms, showers, dorms, hospital wards and prisons. That same lad can also enter into womens sports - very few women, even at the highest level, can compete against a fairly average male. Women will not only lose out in the sports they have trained hard in but also face a real risk of serious injury.

Females to males pose not threat of violence or rape to males and will not be winning any sports competitions against them anytime soon.

It all sounds so lovely and easy "to let em at it" - if only all the uppity women would just pipe down, be kind and let em at it the world would be a much better place.

Not for women it wouldn't.

As ive said,if they cop on and not try force their views and use commonsense about certain situations??


Isnt the most famous international sporting case about transgender in texas of a female to male wrestler who isnt allowed into male competitions,but is dosed up on testosterone and cleaning up??

Where should he/she/whatever wrestle?



Like.seems to me,yous are screaming woman being oppressed to shout down any discussion about this.....is this in effect any differemt than trannies screaming transphobe at people for saying women dont have penis?? (Which they dont)

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

How could you not be able to? That's what's so ****ing bizarre and unbelievable.

It'll be known as Shania Twain'ing.