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

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Same vague argument used against teaching kids evolution, etc.

Depends what you teach. If you teach children that some people have a mental health condition called gender dysphoria that can make them uncomfortable with their biological reality, sometimes to such an extreme extent that they can only live somewhat comfortably if they receive cross-sex hormones and cosmetic surgery, and even then it's certainly not a sure thing—and that those people are as worthy of compassion and respect as anyone else—then, sure.

But that's not what TRAs want taught. And I'd have thought that teaching children that humans have a gendered soul that can be matched to the wrong sex body—a fundamentally religious argument by any measure—would actually be more akin to arguments against teaching evolution.

Gradius

Overheal wrote: »

Same vague argument used against teaching kids evolution, etc.

"vague argument"

Absolutely gas, coming from a bloke that wholeheartedly buys into 100% fiction that not only is fiction, but also contradicts all measurable reality.

Overheal

Gradius wrote: »

"vague argument"

Absolutely gas, coming from a bloke that wholeheartedly buys into 100% fiction that not only is fiction, but also contradicts all measurable reality.

Awfully big shoes to fill. Whats your proof of this, and also, what are you even talking about.

Gradius

Overheal wrote: »

Awfully big shoes to fill. Whats your proof of this, and also, what are you even talking about.

No, buddy, I'm not going to any length to explain why washing machines aren't elephants. The onus is on you to tell me how...

1) anatomy can be dismissed
2) chemistry can be dismissed
3) physiology can be dismissed
4) eyes, ears, and logic can dismissed

Tell me what exactly it is that you believe, that trump's all the above.

There's something rather sinister about the idea of multi-gendered pronouns being introduced just a few short years ago, followed by the swift advance that children must be taught this as early as possible.

Overheal

Gradius wrote: »

No, buddy, I'm not going to any length to explain why washing machines aren't elephants. The onus is on you to tell me how...

1) anatomy can be dismissed
2) chemistry can be dismissed
3) physiology can be dismissed
4) eyes, ears, and logic can dismissed

Tell me what exactly it is that you believe, that trump's all the above.

When did I make these arguments?

I think you have me confused with someone else.

Gradius

Overheal wrote: »

When did I make these arguments?

I think you have me confused with someone else.

Sorry, I'm just making a rational estimation of your belief systems. Maybe I'm wrong and you don't believe any of this stuff.

But if you do, maybe you'd care to explain how "some other people" have belief systems that allow

1) anatomy to be dismissed
2) chemistry to be dismissed
3) physiology to be dismissed
4) eyes, ears, and logic to be dismissed

Can you explain that?

Overheal

Gradius wrote: »

Sorry, I'm just making a rational estimation of your belief systems. Maybe I'm wrong and you don't believe any of this stuff.

But if you do, maybe you'd care to explain how "some other people" have belief systems that allow

1) anatomy to be dismissed
2) chemistry to be dismissed
3) physiology to be dismissed
4) eyes, ears, and logic to be dismissed

Can you explain that?

I believe those other people can speak for themselves, and reading back on some of the thread, they have. Perhaps your arguments are best made at them. To my recollection, I was only interested in rebutting the argument that teaching a child someone's pronouns is tantamount to child abuse. If I got blackout drunk one night and started going off about the definition of womanhood its news to me.

Is there anything actually written in my posts you wish to attack, or just me?

Gradius

Overheal wrote: »

I believe those other people can speak for themselves, and reading back on some of the thread, they have. Perhaps your arguments are best made at them. To my recollection, I was only interested in rebutting the argument that teaching a child someone's pronouns is tantamount to child abuse. If I got blackout drunk one night and started going off about the definition of womanhood its news to me.

Is there anything actually written in my posts you wish to attack, or just me?

Answers are thin on the ground, that's all. You're certainly on one side of the argument, if it even qualifies as an argument.

I'd imagine, therefore, that if you have the conviction to defend teaching children certain things, you'd at least have some reasoning behind your position.

If someone asked me if the doctrine of Mickeymalooley from North Korea should be taught to children, and I replied with both..

1) absolutely, yes!

and at the same time confessing

2) I actually don't know anything about it, you should ask someone else

...would you take me as a credible person?

Overheal

eskimohunt wrote: »

There's something rather sinister about the idea of multi-gendered pronouns being introduced just a few short years ago, followed by the swift advance that children must be taught this as early as possible.

Fitting, because something sinister is only the mere "impression that something harmful or evil" is afoot.

It being 'sinister' thusly is entirely subjective to the individual commentator.

Overheal

Gradius wrote: »

Answers are thin on the ground, that's all. You're certainly on one side of the argument, if it even qualifies as an argument.

I'd imagine, therefore, that if you have the conviction to defend teaching children certain things, you'd at least have some reasoning behind your position.

If someone asked me if the doctrine of Mickeymalooley from North Korea should be taught to children, and I replied with both..

1) absolutely, yes!

and at the same time confessing

2) I actually don't know anything about it, you should ask someone else

...would you take me as a credible person?

Not at the moment, no. I waded in to make a single point - that teaching gender pronouns is not child abuse, and you've on your own accord decided to assume a lot of things about me, including that I somehow "wholeheartedly 100%" buy into whatever your nebulous definition of "one side of the argument" is.

Gradius

Overheal wrote: »

Not at the moment, no. I waded in to make a single point - that teaching gender pronouns is not child abuse, and you've on your own accord decided to assume a lot of things about me, including that I somehow "wholeheartedly 100%" buy into whatever your nebulous definition of "one side of the argument" is.

You're typing words that amount to nothing in terms of argument.

You've dodged my questions, and those questions are directly related to your position on child abuse/not child abuse.

You can't seem to substantiate WHY you think it isn't child abuse.

Let me make it as simple as possible for you.

I say that teaching children things that are directly contradictory to things like anatomy, observation, biology etc are within the sphere of purposeful miseducation. And that is certainly within a shared sphere of child abuse.

You say it isn't.

Why?

Gentlemanne

The irony is not lost on me which posters are against teaching children more information on the issue.

NoLuckLarry

Gentlemanne wrote: »

The irony is not lost on me which posters are against teaching children more information on the issue.

Children have zero need to know about any of this, ZERO.

Gentlemanne

Overheal wrote: »

Fitting, because something sinister is only the mere "impression that something harmful or evil" is afoot.

It being 'sinister' thusly is entirely subjective to the individual commentator.

Interestingly, the root for "sinister" is related to left handedness. As recently as a few decades ago in Ireland, actual child abuse in school was occuring, where teachers would smack left-handed children for being themselves.

Those pesky progressives got rid of that unfortunately, now they teach kids that they can write with whatever hand they'd like. It's political correctness gone mad!

Overheal

Gradius wrote: »

You're typing words that amount to nothing in terms of argument.

You've dodged my questions, and those questions are directly related to your position on child abuse/not child abuse.

You can't seem to substantiate WHY you think it isn't child abuse.

Let me make it as simple as possible for you.

I say that teaching children things that are directly contradictory to things like anatomy, observation, biology etc are within the sphere of purposeful miseducation. And that is certainly within a shared sphere of child abuse.

You say it isn't.

Why?

You pretend as though you did ask me "questions" rather, you charged me with an "onus" to explain to you a series of rather loaded points:

Gradius wrote: »

No, buddy, I'm not going to any length to explain why washing machines aren't elephants. The onus is on you to tell me how...

1) anatomy can be dismissed
2) chemistry can be dismissed
3) physiology can be dismissed
4) eyes, ears, and logic can dismissed

Tell me what exactly it is that you believe, that trump's all the above.

As though I ever made any statement dismissing anatomy, chemistry, physiology, or logical argument.

If I did make any such statement please quote it, so we can come to some form of agreement on what "onus" I have to explain anything to you.

From there you proceeded to get increasingly frustrated that I am not the bogeyman/punching bag you were looking for, and have continued to look for ever inventive ways to spin the narrative as me being some 'champion' for whatever perceived other side of your argument is.

Like, if you have points just make them. I'm not the topic and neither are you. Suffice to say I do not believe that teaching gender pronouns to students is child abuse. Do you?

Overheal

NoLuckLarry wrote: »

Children have zero need to know about any of this, ZERO.

I disagree, from personal experience. With adult supervision/education or not, children will discuss these issues. I think I've mentioned in this thread or in Unpopular Opinions, in the 90's we had a hermaphrodite student in class. It wasn't ever going to be likely we would have just ignored it and never discuss it, just because the teacher never brought it up first or as part of a lecture. Kids should be taught what is happening in the world outside the classroom, especially if its being talked about everywhere else in the culture. I no more think it child abuse that adults had to explain Donald Trump to them. It was just a reality.

NoLuckLarry

Overheal wrote: »

I disagree, from personal experience. With adult supervision/education or not, children will discuss these issues. I think I've mentioned in this thread or in Unpopular Opinions, in the 90's we had a hermaphrodite student in class. It wasn't ever going to be likely we would have just ignored it and never discuss it, just because the teacher never brought it up first or as part of a lecture.

I think children should be left to discuss more innocent things suited to their age, delusions about the body are not one of them.

Overheal

NoLuckLarry wrote: »

I think children should be left to discuss more innocent things suited to their age, delusions about the body are not one of them.

Well, when we were left to discuss things, left to our innocence ie. recess, we all chose to discuss hermaphroditism, because it was right there before us.

Kids are going to discuss gender pronouns whether there is a sane educator in the loop or not.

NoLuckLarry

NoLuckLarry wrote: »

Children have zero need to know about any of this, ZERO.

I disagree with that. It's a "hot topic" in the culture, education is rife with adherents, and any parent that wants their child to be robust enough to withstand any indoctrination attempt inside educational institutions should make sure they give their child a firm grounding in what sex is, what gender is considered to be, and how they're related.

Also worth checking your child's curriculum, challenging anything that requires it, and making sure you join parents' associations and school management boards wherever possible.

NoLuckLarry

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I disagree with that. It's a "hot topic" in the culture, education is rife with adherents, and any parent that wants their child to be robust enough to withstand any indoctrination attempt inside educational institutions should make sure they give their child a firm grounding in what sex is, what gender is considered to be, and how they're related.

Also worth checking your child's curriculum, challenging anything that requires it, and making sure you join parents' associations and school management boards wherever possible.

Absolutely agree with your points but that is parental responsibility to reject this type of education particularly in settings where young children are concerned. The birds and bees chat with my young one will not be including any of this, but she will understand biological sexes and the difference between both of them like every other child since day 1.

Mic 1972

Overheal wrote: »

Well, when we were left to discuss things, left to our innocence ie. recess, we all chose to discuss hermaphroditism, because it was right there before us.

Kids are going to discuss gender pronouns whether there is a sane educator in the loop or not.

teaching gender pronouns to kids isnt a sane form of education to begin with

Gentlemanne

Gentlemanne wrote: »

Those pesky progressives got rid of that unfortunately, now they teach kids that they can write with whatever hand they'd like. It's political correctness gone mad!

They were also big fans of eugenics so it's not like they're infallible, ya know?

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

Same vague argument used against teaching kids evolution, etc.

It's fairly easy to demonstrate evolution.

It's pretty hard to demonstrate that someone born with a penis is a woman just because they say they are.

Baggly

NoLuckLarry wrote: »

It is abuse in a way though because you are teaching the child that they must pander to others delusions about themselves and fully support that delusion by using idiotic words that 99.9999% of the world population will never ever use. Sorry but there's a line there between teaching a child to speak correct English and telling them they must use this wishy washy **** a minority group have created for themselves.

Mod

1 week forum ban for equating educating on trans issues with abuse.

Overheal

Mic 1972 wrote: »

teaching gender pronouns to kids isnt a sane form of education to begin with

How is it being taught that is not sane?

Baggly

Gradius wrote: »

"vague argument"

Absolutely gas, coming from a bloke that wholeheartedly buys into 100% fiction that not only is fiction, but also contradicts all measurable reality.

Mod

Attacking the poster. Threadbanned.

Overheal

BattleCorp wrote: »

It's fairly easy to demonstrate evolution.

It's pretty hard to demonstrate that someone born with a penis is a woman just because they say they are.

That's a matter for educators to consider. I haven't really seen a gender studies curriculum per grade level to make my own sufficiently informed opinion about how sane/insane that curriculum is.

Gentlemanne

Mic 1972 wrote: »

teaching gender pronouns to kids isnt a sane form of education to begin with

What do you think pronouns are? Kids are already being taught pronouns, its a fairly basic aspect of the english language.

Overheal

Gentlemanne wrote: »

What do you think pronouns are? Kids are already being taught pronouns, its a fairly basic aspect of the english language.

Sesame Street aka US Public Broadcasting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENOADuDwfK4

I'm sure at one point, this clip 'pushing the feminist agenda' was also seen as child abuse(?) then again, kids shows could just have easily taught them a womans place is in the kitchen, or even vile brainwashing against Jews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpjmeyI2pfI

In some countries, Sesame Street programming is farther behind our western progressive curve - eg. in Afghanistan they are making progress just by having female characters to begin with:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPyJBMDhEjI

I cannot seem to find any clip of the show however that delves into non-conventional gender pronouns.